Minimally invasive resection of spinal hemangioblastoma: feasibility and clinical results in a series of 18 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hemangioblastomas are benign, highly vascularized tumors that can occur sporadically or as part of von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease. Traditionally, spinal hemangioblastomas have been surgically treated via an open approach. In recent years, however, minimally invasive techniques using tubular retractors have been increasingly applied in spine surgery. Such procedures involve less tissue trauma but are also particularly demanding for the surgeon, especially in cases of highly vascular tumors such as hemangioblastomas. The object of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive resection of selected spinal hemangioblastomas. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective single-center study of all patients who, between January 2010 and January 2018, had been operated on for spinal hemangioblastoma via a minimally invasive approach performed at the surgeon's discretion. The surgical technique is described and the pre- and postoperative neurological and imaging results were analyzed descriptively. The primary outcome was the postoperative compared to preoperative neurological condition (McCormick grade). The secondary outcomes were the extent of tumor resection and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Eighteen patients, 12 female and 6 male, harboring a total of 19 spinal hemangioblastomas underwent surgery in the study period. Seventeen patients had stable neurological findings with stable or improved McCormick grades (94.5%) at a mean of 4.3 months after surgery. One (5.5%) of the 18 patients developed progressive neurological symptoms with a worsened McCormick grade that did not improve in the long-term follow-up. Sixteen of the 18 patients had VHL disease, whereas 2 patients had sporadic spinal hemangioblastomas. In all patients, postoperative MRI showed complete resection of the tumors. No other surgery-related perioperative or postoperative complications were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: A minimally invasive approach for the resection of selected spinal hemangioblastomas is safe and allows complete tumor resection with good clinical results in experienced hands.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".