Eustachian Tube Obliteration and its Effect on Rhinoliquorrhea in Translabyrinthine Vestibular Schwannoma Excision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Rhinoliquorrhea is defined as a cerebrospinal fluid leakage from the nose. Our objective in this study is to determine the reduction of rhinoliquorrhea rates by Eustachian tube (ET) obliteration in the context of a translabyrinthine approach performed following vestibular schwannoma (VS) excision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective study achieved in a tertiary-care center where the chart review revealed 94 VS operated by the translabyrinthine approach between 2009 and 2015. There were 40 males and 54 females aged from 28-76 years. The only exclusion criterion was a previous history of cranial surgery. ET obliteration was systematically executed when the petrous apex pneumatization level was at least 2 of 4. Our main outcome measure was the development of rhinoliquorrhea. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients underwent ET obliteration and were followed for an average of 2.6±1.2 years. Rhinoliquorrhea was reported in 1.14% of the patients having had an ET obliteration. When compared to our previous sample of patients operated with a translabyrinthine approach, it represents a reduction of 84%. CONCLUSION: Obliteration of the ET is a fast and simple procedure that reduces the rate of rhinoliquorrhea. We therefore recommend its use, specifically in cases of petrous apex pneumatization levels 2-4.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".