Transmastoid resurfacing of superior semicircular canal dehiscence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To describe a new and fast surgical technique in treating superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome by resurfacing the canal defect via the transmastoid approach without retraction of the whole temporal lobe and to demonstrate the clinical and audiologic results of the superior canal dehiscence repair. Superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome is a well-described pathology. Surgical procedures through the middle fossa approach to resurface the superior canal and transmastoid plugging are considered the main surgical therapeutic options for patients with debilitating symptoms. Both have drawbacks; plugging is invasive to the inner ear, and resurfacing requires a middle fossa approach. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: Four patients presented with classic symptomatic semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome with radiographic confirmation of their dehiscence. The patients underwent the resurfacing procedure with a transmastoid approach. RESULTS: All four patients reported resolution of their symptoms. Audiograms documented some improvement in three subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The transmastoid approach for resurfacing superior semicircular canal dehiscence is a safe and less-invasive technique than the standard middle fossa approach, which has many potential complications and requires much longer hospitalization. In our study, the surgeries were completed within 90 minutes, and patients stayed in the hospital only overnight.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".