MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792026937 · doi:10.3171/2017.11.peds17526

Edema of the optic tract in patients with tumors of the sellar region: clinical and visual implications in the pediatric population

2018· article· en· W2792026937 on OpenAlexaff
Aurore Bussat, Maïa Proisy, Bertrand Bruneau, Guillaume Bouzillé, Céline Chappé, Laurent Riffaud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraniopharyngiomaMedicineVisual acuityVisual fieldOptic chiasmPopulationRetrospective cohort studyOphthalmologyMedical recordSurgeryOptic nerve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE Tumor-related edema of the optic tract (EOT) corresponds to a preferential posterior distribution of peritumoral edema along the white matter tract of the visual system. To date, the consequences of EOT have never been evaluated specifically in the pediatric population. In this study, the authors attempted to identify clinical and radiological features associated with the development of EOT and the specific influence of this edema on visual function. METHODS A retrospective review was performed of data collected from patients younger than 18 years who underwent surgery for a tumor in the sellar region at the authors' institution between January 2005 and January 2016. Data were collected on patient characteristics, ophthalmological evaluations, and neuroimaging findings. To evaluate and compare visual function impairment, ophthalmological data were converted to a global visual function score, which took into account visual acuity, visual field evaluations, and laterality deficiencies. The visual acuity score was defined according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. Visual field deficiencies were converted to a score of 0-2. Two opposing groups were then distinguished according to the presence or absence of EOT. Visual acuity, visual field results, and global scores were compared between groups before and after treatment. RESULTS Twenty-six patients were included in the study: 17 patients with craniopharyngioma, 3 patients with pilocytic astrocytoma, 2 patients with ganglioglioma, 2 patients with germ cell tumor, 1 patient with macroprolactinoma, and 1 patient with Rathke's cleft cyst. There were 11 children in the group with edema and 15 children in the group without edema. None of the following criteria were statistically different between the 2 groups: age, sex, clinical symptoms at presentation (endocrine deficiency or intracranial hypertension signs), incidence of hydrocephalus, compression of the optic tracts and mass effect on the optic chiasm, tumor size and localization, presence of intratumoral cysts, treatment, type of tumor, or recurrence. The median global visual function and visual acuity scores were not significantly different between the groups either at presentation or at final evaluation. The visual field score was lower (i.e., more deficiency) in the group with edema than in the group without edema (p < 0.05); 89% of the patients with edema had severe or mild visual field impairment versus only 40% of the patients without edema. At the final examination after treatment, the visual field scores were not different between the 2 groups. Although not significant, the number of patients with optic disc pallor was greater in the group without edema both at diagnosis and at final examination. CONCLUSIONS This study confirms that EOT in the context of sellar region tumor in children is not necessarily associated with a less-favorable visual prognosis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207