MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2433462324 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.159

P.055 Bilateral facial nerve gadolinium enhancement and GBS

2016· article· en· W2433462324 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M Alshurem, EK O’Ferrall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGeniculate ganglionPalsyFacial nerveCranial nervesFacial paralysisCorneal reflexFacial weaknessDifferential diagnosisFacial musclesWeaknessSurgeryAnatomyAnesthesiaPathologyReflex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Facial diplegia with parasthesia (FDP) is a rare variant of Guillain–Barre syndrome (GBS), and has been reported in less than 1% of GBS cohorts. Here we describe a case of FDP with novel imaging findings and discuss the differential diagnosis. Methods: Case: A 39-year-old man referred to the emergency department with a 2 week history of right facial palsy progressed to bilateral facial palsy. His exam demonstrated severe, complete facial diplegia with only very mild limb weakness and present but diminished deep tendon reflexes. Results: Cerebrospinal fluid analysis showed albuminocytologic dissociation. Electromyography was consistent with a demyelinating process. MRI with contrast revealed bilateral enhancement of the facial nerves in the intracanalicular portion and in the region of the geniculate ganglion. A diagnosis of GBS was made and the patient was treated with IVIG. Over the course of several weeks the patient improved. Conclusions: Although nerve root enhancement of the spinal cord is described with GBS, nerve root enhancement effecting cranial nerves has only rarely been described. In addition, the relative limb-sparing with complete facial paralysis in this case is also an unusual phenotype. The Gadolinium enhancement of the bilateral facial nerves is thought to represent blood brain barrier breakdown due to GBS.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.266 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicFacial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207