The Superior Hypophyseal Arteries: Anatomical Study with an Endoscopic Endonasal Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of high-definition endoscopes in extended transsphenoidal approaches to the suprasellar area has significantly improved visualization of its vascularization. OBJECTIVE: To systematically examine the superior hypophyseal arteries (SHAs) anatomy from an endonasal endoscopic perspective. METHODS: The endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal trans-tuberculum approach was performed in 19 adult, fresh and latex injected specimens. Dissections recordings were reviewed to analyze SHAs type, number, and branches, as well as internal carotid arteries (ICA) branches that vascularized optic nerves and chiasm. RESULTS: Identification of SHAs was possible in all specimens (37/38 sides). The number of SHAs varied from 1 to 3 per side (mean: 1.7). The anterior superior hypophyseal artery was visible in almost all cases (35/37 sides) and originated at the level of the carotid cave in 18/35 specimens; number of branches ranged from 1 to 6 (mean: 3.5), directed to the optic nerve (86%), chiasm (57%), infundibulum (86%), and/or parallel to the pituitary stalk (74%). The 4 main branches and patterns, originally described by McConnell in 1953, were confirmed. The posterior superior hypophyseal artery was evident in 28/37 sides with number of branches ranging from 0 to 4 (mean: 2.1), directed to the optic chiasm (50%), optic tract (32%), infundibulum (79%), and/or pituitary stalk (36%). The surgical implications of this study, together with anatomical and clinical videos, are also briefly discussed. CONCLUSION: SHAs constitute a complex of anterior and posterior branches that stem from the medial ICA with different patterns, vascularizing the optic apparatus and pituitary stalk.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".