EXPANDED ENDOSCOPIC ENDONASAL APPROACH FOR TREATMENT OF CLIVAL CHORDOMAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We report our recent experience with an expanded purely endoscopic endonasal approach for the treatment of clival chordomas. METHODS: Twelve patients underwent an expanded endoscopic approach for excision of cranial base chordomas at Toronto Western Hospital. Two patients had undergone a previous craniotomy for excision of a significant lateral intracranial extension of the tumor. All other patients had mainly centrally located lesions. Three patients had recurrent tumors. This study focused on the surgical approach, results, and complications associated with this approach. RESULTS: Diplopia caused by VIth nerve palsy was the most common presenting symptom and was observed in seven patients. Gross total resection of the tumor was achieved in seven patients (58%). Four patients had complete recovery of their preoperative diplopia. One patient (8%) presented with new hemiparesis postoperatively. Four patients (33%) had a cerebrospinal fluid leak postoperatively; two were treated by lumbar drainage, and two required a secondary surgical repair. All newly diagnosed patients underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. There was no mortality. The short-term outcome was excellent in all but one patient. No recurrence was observed at the median follow-up period of 16 months. CONCLUSION: The expanded endoscopic endonasal approach is a valid minimally invasive alternative for the treatment of centrally located clival chordomas or as an adjunct for the central part of chordomas with lateral extension. The early results of this technique indicate at least equivalency to more extensive open approaches, and its versatility may widen the horizon of surgical management of these aggressive lesions. The challenge with the cerebrospinal fluid leakage is being addressed with novel local flap repair techniques. This approach should be in the armamentarium of cranial base surgeons as an option in the management of clival chordomas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".