Atypical vertebral hemangioma: an aggressive form of a benign disease. Case Report and Literature Review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertebral hemangiomas are an incidental and relatively common radiological finding and a benign tumor of vascular origin. VH are the most common spine tumors with an estimated incidence of 1.9-27% in the general population. Rarely, vertebral hemangiomas can exhibit extraosseous expansion with resulting compression of the spinal cord. Such lesions are termed aggressive or atypical vertebral hemangiomas (AVH) and account for less than 1% of spinal hemangiomas. A 68-year-old female was referred with progressive walking difficulty and sensory disturbances in her lower extremities. MRI imaging of the thoracic spine revealed a T1- and T2-weighted hyperintense lesion involving the T10 vertebra. Additionally, there was extraosseous extension of the tumor into the spinal canal, located both anterior and posterior to the spinal cord, causing severe spinal cord compression. A combined endovascular and surgical approach (arterial coil embolization and en bloc resection) for treatment was decided. Although vertebral hemangiomas are an incidental and relatively common radiological finding, the findings of our case were consistent with an aggressive hemangioma with atypical MRI and clinical prognostic characteristics. In summary, the present case highlights the need for multidisciplinary approach and in-depth knowledge of this rare pathologic entity.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".