Lymphatic Malformation Architecture: Implications for Treatment With OK-432
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Herein, the authors aim to describe their findings of novel architectural types of lymphatic malformations (LM) and explain the relationship between these architectures and OK-432 treatment outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients diagnosed with a LM treated with OK-432 at the Vascular Anomalies Clinic at BC Children's Hospital from December 2002 to January 2012. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included in the study. Sixty percent of lesions were present by 2 years of age with the majority located in the head and neck (59%). The average number of sclerotherapy procedures was 1.4 per patient. Treatment under fluoroscopic guidance revealed 3 new LM architectures: open-cell microcystic, closed-cell microcystic, and lymphatic channel. Response to treatment was complete or good for 14/19 macrocystic and for 1/2 mixed lesions. Open-cell microcystic LMs gave a complete or good response for 3/3, which was attributed to OK-432 freely communicating between cysts. Closed-cell microcystic LM had localized cysts that did not allow OK-432 to freely communicate and were associated with partial responses, 2/2. The lymphatic channel had a partial response. There were 2 minor complications and 1 instance of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of 3 new LM architectures expands the current accepted classification to include: open-cell microcystic, closed-cell microcystic, and lymphatic channels. The majority of complete responses to OK-432 were found with macrocystic lesions. Open-cell microcystic lesions respond better to OK-432 than closed-cell microcystic lesions, and lymphatic channels may respond to OK-432. These key architecture-response relationships have direct clinical implications for treatment with OK-432 sclerotherapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".