In Situ Cranioplasty for Hyperostosing Meningiomas of the Cranial Vault
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hyperostosis of the bone overlying meningiomas has been reported in up to 50% of cases. The skull becomes infiltrated by meningothelial tumor cells, necessitating removal of the hypertrophied bone to achieve a complete tumor resection. Unfortunately, aesthetic reconstruction of large bony defects can pose a significant challenge intra-operatively. Custom cranioplasty implants are very expensive and can only be fabricated after the bony defect exists, requiring a second surgery for implantation. Although numerous composite materials exist to repair the defects at the time of tumor resection, the challenge is to create an implant that fits appropriately without shifting and approximates the natural curvature of the skull. We have developed a technique for an "in situ cranioplasty" using a composite construct with strength in compression and tension. TECHNIQUE: After the skull is reshaped by shaving down part of the hyperostotic bone, titanium mesh is molded to the surface of the skull and screwed into the surrounding normal bone. The bone flap is then removed by drilling a trough at the outer margin of the tumor-involved skull and removing a ring of normal surrounding bone. The central portion of tumor involved skull is then craniectomized. The mesh can be reapplied and the full thickness of the central bone can be reconstructed with polymethylmethacrylate, yielding a solid construct perfectly matched to the patient's natural head shape. CONCLUSION: This novel technique yields a sturdy, aesthetic, and cost-effective result which can be used to address any cranial vault defect at the time of tumor resection.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".