MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517378513 · doi:10.1002/alr.21783

Factors impacting cerebrospinal fluid leak rates in endoscopic sellar surgery

2016· article· en· W2517378513 on OpenAlexaff
Tom T. Karnezis, Andrew B. Baker, Zachary M. Soler, Sarah K. Wise, Shruthi K. Rereddy, Zara M. Patel, Nelson M. Oyesiku, John M. DelGaudio, Constantinos G. Hadjipanayis, Bradford A. Woodworth, Kristen Riley, Michael D. Cusimano, Satish Govindaraj, Alkis J. Psaltis, Peter J. Wormald, Steve Santoreneos, Raj Sindwani, Samuel J. Trosman, Janalee K. Stokken, Troy D. Woodard, Pablo F. Recinos, William A. Vandergrift, Rodney J. Schlosser

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersGenentechOlympus
KeywordsMedicineCraniopharyngiomaLeakCerebrospinal fluid leakSurgeryPituitary neoplasmCerebrospinal fluidOdds ratioTranssphenoidal surgeryPituitary adenomaPituitary glandAdenomaInternal medicineHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing transnasal endoscopic sellar surgery, an analysis of risk factors and predictors of intraoperative and postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (CSF) would provide important prognostic information. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing endoscopic sellar surgery for pituitary adenomas or craniopharyngiomas between 2002 and 2014 at 7 international centers was performed. Demographic, comorbidity, and tumor characteristics were evaluated to determine the associations between intraoperative and postoperative CSF leaks. Correlations between reconstructive and CSF diversion techniques were associated with postoperative CSF leak rates. Odds ratios (OR) were identified using a multivariate logistic regression model. RESULTS: Data were collected on 1108 pituitary adenomas and 53 craniopharyngiomas. Overall, 30.1% of patients had an intraoperative leak and 5.9% had a postoperative leak. Preoperative factors associated with increased intraoperative leaks were mild liver disease, craniopharyngioma, and extension into the anterior cranial fossa. In patients with intraoperative CSF leaks, postoperative leaks occurred in 10.3%, with a higher postoperative leak rate in craniopharyngiomas (20.8% vs 5.1% in pituitary adenomas). Once an intraoperative leak occurred, craniopharyngioma (OR = 4.255, p = 0.010) and higher body mass index (BMI) predicted postoperative leak (OR = 1.055, p = 0.010). In patients with an intraoperative leak, the use of septal flaps reduced the occurrence of postoperative leak (OR = 0.431, p = 0.027). Rigid reconstruction and CSF diversion techniques did not impact postoperative leak rates. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative CSF leaks can occur during endoscopic sellar surgery, especially in larger tumors or craniopharyngiomas. Once an intraoperative leak occurs, risk factors for postoperative leaks include craniopharyngiomas and higher BMI. Use of septal flaps decreases this risk.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Forum of Allergy & RhinologySame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207