MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313127100 · doi:10.1055/s-0036-1580052

A Modification to the Transfacial Approach for Large Middle Cranial Base Tumors: A Technical Report

2016· article· en· W2313127100 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Lavigne, Michel W. Bojanowski, François Lavigne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClivusMedicineSkullSurgeryResectionBase of skull

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objective Extensive tumors of the clivus, anterior skull base or anterior brainstem are technically challenging to skull base surgeons. Numerous open approaches have been described to resect extra or intra-dural lesions but some provide limited exposure or cause functional dysfunctions. We present a technical report on a new transfacial approach to the midline cranial base that provides exposure from the rostral frontal sinus to the inferior clivus. This new approach is a modification from the classic Weber-Fergusson incision with maxillary swing. It allows an optimal exposure for tumor resection without the morbidity associated with a maxillectomy. A small case series of patients in whom this approach was used will be reviewed. Surgical Technique Bilateral subciliary incisions are joined on the glabela and a midline nasal incision is drawn down to the lip. The lip is split to expose the maxillary alveolar process. The nasal cavity is entered lateral to the quadrangular cartilage, between the alar cartilages. The nasal bones and maxilla are exposed with limited soft tissue dissection through the subciliairy incisions. Both frontal process of the maxillary and alveolar process are osteotomized to create a rectangle opening on the anterior wall of both maxillary sinuses. The lateral limit of the osteotomies is the infra-obital nerve. The nasal septum and vomer are detached from the maxillary crest. This allows the anterior wall of the maxillary with the attached half-nose to be swung laterally up to the infra-orbital nerve. The resulting exposure is a bilaterally widened pyriform aperture with direct exposure to the ethmoids, maxillary sinuses, nasopharynx and clivus. After tumor resection and skull base reconstruction, the anterior maxillary wall and nose are swung back medially. Because no soft tissue dissection was performed, the periostum remains attached to the maxilla. Osteotomies are approximated with the closure of the facial soft tissues without the need of plates and screws. Results: This technique was used to approach a large clival chordoma in a 56 year old woman. Endoscopic approaches combined to radiotherapy had previously failed. The exposure allowed for total removal of the clival tumor under microscopic vision. A pericranial flap was used to reconstruct the skull base. The post operative period was noticeable for a CSF leak that was surgically occluded. Patient was discharged home and remains free of gross residual disease 8 months later. A unilateral modification of this approach was used during a craniofacial resection in a 21 year old male with an extensive sarcoma involving the maxillary, ethmoid and anterior cranial base. The orbit was preserved and the patient had a complete functional recovery after the procedure. Conclusion: This trans-facial approach allows for very large exposure to the ethmoids, maxillaries, nasopharynx and clivus. It compares favorably to other open approaches in functional and aesthetic morbidity. The dissection can be performed uni or bilaterally depending on the involved tissues. It has the benefit of providing better exposure for en-block resection with a wide bilateral trans-facial view.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull BaseSame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207