Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal epidural angiolipoma is a rare cause of spinal cord compression. We present a case and review the clinical presentation, radiological appearance, pathological aspects and treatment of this distinct clinico-pathological entity. METHODS: A case of a 46-year-old woman with a five-month history of progressive myelopathy affecting her lower extremities is presented. CT and MRI revealed a large epidural fat-containing mass compressing the spinal cord dorsally at the T7-T8 level. A laminectomy was performed with gross total resection of the lesion. RESULTS: The patient's neurologic symptoms improved postoperatively. A two-year follow-up period has revealed no signs of tumor recurrence and no neurological deficit. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of spinal angiolipoma should be considered in the differential diagnosis of spinal cord compression. Magnetic resonance imaging is the investigation of choice. The surgical objective is complete excision but, for anterior lesions involving bone, an overly aggressive approach should be tempered by an awareness of the overall indolent natural history of so-called "infiltrating" spinal angiolipomas that are only partially excised.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".