Stereotactic radiosurgery does not appear to impact cochlear implant performance in patients with neurofibromatosis type II.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Neurofibromatosis Type 2 (NF2) is a genetic condition associated with the presence of bilateral vestibular schwannoma and progressive sensorineural hearing loss. Treatment options include observation, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or surgical resection. Historically, retrocochlear pathology was a contraindication to cochlear implantation (CI). However it is now recognized as viable, in an attempt to restore hearing and improve communication.Thus, the aim of this study was to contrast auditory function in CI recipients with NF2 whose tumors were either observed versus initially treated with SRS. METHODS: A local review of hearing outcomes in 2 CI patients (3 ears total) with NF2 was undertaken and then pooled with the existing medical literature. Comparative post-implant outcome data, including pure-tone average and aided speech perception measurements was analyzed and compared between 8 subjects whose tumors were observed and 11 subjects who received pre-implantation SRS. RESULTS: Mean tumor size in the observation cohort was 0.81cm (.13cm to 1.50cm), and 2.34cm in the SRS group (0.10cm to 3.7cm). The mean reported duration of deafness was 22 months as compared to 71 months in the SRS cohort. Both groups demonstrated similar pre-implant candidacy criteria, average age and open-set speech recognition. Although disparate outcome measurements were utilized across studies, an analysis of post-implant open-set speech perception found no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Despite a small sample size and highly variable post implantation testing methods, patients who undergo SRS for NF2 associated Schwannoma prior to CI have similar hearing performance and benefit by having already completed definitive tumor management.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".