Microscopic and macroscopic infarct complicating pediatric epilepsy surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is some suggestion that microscopic infarct could be associated with invasive monitoring, but it is unclear if the microscopic infarct is also visible on imaging and associated with neurologic deficits. The aims of this study were to assess the rates of microscopic and macroscopic infarct and other major complications of pediatric epilepsy surgery, and to determine if these complications were higher following invasive monitoring. METHODS: We reviewed the epilepsy surgery data from a tertiary pediatric center, and collected data on microscopic infarct on histology and macroscopic infarct on postoperative computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) done one day after surgery and major complications. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-two patients underwent surgical resection and there was one death. Forty-two percent had invasive monitoring. Thirty patients (9%) had microscopic infarct. Univariable analyses showed that microscopic infarct was higher among patients with invasive monitoring relative to no invasive monitoring (20% vs. 0.5%, respectively, p < 0.001). Eighteen patients (5%) had macroscopic infarct on CT or MRI. Univariable analysis showed no significant difference in macroscopic infarct between invasive monitoring and no invasive monitoring (8% vs. 3%, respectively, p = 0.085). One patient with microscopic infarct had transient right hemiparesis, and two with both macroscopic and microscopic infarct had unexpected persistent neurologic deficits. Thirty-two major complications (9.1%) were reported, with no difference in major complications between invasive monitoring and no invasive monitoring (10% vs. 7%, p = 0.446). In the multivariable analysis, invasive monitoring increased the odds of microscopic infarct (odds ratio [OR] 15.87, p = 0.009), but not macroscopic infarct (OR 2.6, p = 0.173) or major complications (OR 1.4, p = 0.500), after adjusting for age at surgery, sex, age at seizure onset, operative type, and operative location. SIGNIFICANCE: Microscopic infarct was associated with invasive monitoring, and none of the patients had permanent neurologic deficits. Macroscopic infarct was not associated with invasive monitoring, and two patients with macroscopic infarct had persistent neurologic deficits.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".