MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330388515 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000001232

Risk Factors for Recurrence of Surgically Treated Conventional Spinal Schwannomas

2015· article· en· W2330388515 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Fehlings, Anick Nater, Juan J. Zamorano, Lindsay Tetreault, Péter Varga, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Stefano Boriani, Charles G. Fisher, Laurence D. Rhines, Chetan Bettegowda, Norio Kawahara, Dean Chou

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineSchwannomaHazard ratioUnivariate analysisLumbarRetrospective cohort studySurgeryLogistic regressionMultivariate analysisConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of 169 adult patients operated for a conventional spinal schwannoma from the AOSpine Multicenter Primary Spinal Tumors Database. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for local recurrence of conventional spinal schwannoma in patients who had surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Schwannomas account for up to 30% of all adult spinal tumors. Total resection is the gold standard for patients with sensory or motor deficits. Local recurrence is reported to be approximately 5% and usually occurs several years after surgery. METHODS: Rates and time of local recurrence of spinal schwannoma were quantified. Predictive value of various clinical factors was assessed, including age, gender, tumor size, affected spinal segment, and type of surgery. Descriptive statistics and univariate regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Nine (5.32%) out the 169 patients in this study experienced local recurrence approximately 1.7 years postoperatively. Univariate analyses revealed that recurrence tended to occur more often in younger patients (39.33 ± 14.58 versus 47.01 ± 15.29 years) and in the lumbar segment (55.56%), although this did not reach significance [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, P = 0.127; and P = 0.195, respectively]. Recurrence also arose in the cervical and sacral spine (22.22%, respectively) but not in the thoracic area. Tumors were significantly larger in patients with recurrence (6.97 ± 4.66 cm versus 3.81 ± 3.34 cm), with extent in the cranial caudal direction posing the greatest hazard (HR = 1.321, P = 0.002). The location of the tumor, whether epidural, intradural, or both (P = 0.246), was not significantly related to recurrence. Regarding surgical technique, over 4 times as many patients who underwent intralesional resection experienced a recurrence proportionally to patients who underwent en bloc resection (HR = 4.178, P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: The pre-operative size of the conventional spinal schwannoma and intralesional resection are the main risk factors for local postoperative recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations95
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207