MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597491953 · doi:10.1159/000452803

Unilateral Postoperative Deep Cerebral Venous Thrombosis with Complete Recovery: A Report of 2 Cases

2017· article· en· W2597491953 on OpenAlexaff
Mony Benifla, Suzzanne Laughlin, Zulma Tovar-Spinoza, James T. Rutka, Peter Dirks

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Neurosurgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombosisCerebral veinsVenous thrombosisDeep veinNeurosurgerySurgeryComplicationVeinIntraventricular hemorrhageAnesthesiaPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postsurgical deep brain venous thrombosis has not been well described in children before. When approaching thalamic or intraventricular lesions, extra care should be taken to prevent injury to the internal cerebral veins (ICVs) and the vein of Galen. However, even when they are well preserved during surgery, postoperative hemodynamic changes, mainly in the first 24 h, or surgical manipulation can cause thrombosis of these veins. We report 2 children with unilateral postoperative ICV thrombosis; in 1 of the patients the vein of Galen was also thrombosed. Although both patients had altered sensorium initially, no anticoagulation therapy was given, and they both recovered well. When approaching thalamic or intraventricular lesions, extra care should be taken to prevent injury to the ICV and the vein of Galen. The surgeon should respect the deep brain venous system when approaching midline structures. Both the neurosurgeon and the neuroradiologist should be aware of this possible complication in order to make a prompt diagnosis and to offer proper treatment if needed.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric NeurosurgerySame topicCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207