Endoscopic resection of colloid cyst: long-term followup with 65 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Colloid cysts of the third ventricle are rare, histologically benign lesions that can be associated with obstructive hydrocephalus. Endoscopic removal developed as an alternative to microsurgical craniotomy as a less invasive surgical treatment. This review examines the endoscopic surgical experience for a consecutive series of patients with colloid cyst of the third ventricle. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of “colloid cyst of the third ventricle” who were treated in Calgary between January 1994 and July 2014 were reviewed using a clinic database and registry. Results: 95 patients were identified. 30 patients without hydrocephalus underwent serial MRI and clinical observation with one patient developing hydrocephalus leading to surgical treatment. 65 patients underwent endoscopic treatment of their colloid cyst (male=34; female=31). The mean age at diagnosis was 45.5 years. 3 patients had been previously treated with other surgical approaches. All surgically treated patients had hydrocephalus and hydrocephalus resolved in all 65 patients. 1 patient sustained an injury to the internal capsule with transient hemiparesis. Mean followup was 8.2 years (range 0.1-19.3 years). 3 patients experienced colloid cyst recurrence treated with a second endoscopic removal. Conclusion: Endoscopic treatment of third ventricle colloid cysts can be performed with low risk as an alternative to microsurgical resection.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".