P.093 Visual outcomes after expanded endoscopic endonasal resection of suprasellar meningiomas and optic nerve decompression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) has become increasingly popular in the treatment of suprasellar meningiomas, which often cause visual symptoms due to compression of the anterior optic apparatus. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review on patients who underwent EEA optic nerve decompression and resection of suprasellar meningiomas between January 1st 2005 and December 1st 2018 at McMaster University. Results: The mean age of our patients was 59.8 years. We treated 9 male and 23 female patients, with a mean follow up of 6.29 years. 23 patients (71.9%) presented with visual symptoms, with a mean duration of 8.65 months. In our patient cohort, 95.5% had stable or improved visual acuity postoperatively. Less than six months of visual decline was more likely to be associated with postoperative improvement of visual acuity, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.0222 (95% CI: 0.0017–0.289, p<0.05); as well as visual field (OR:0.0625; 95% CI, 0.0042–0.915, p<0.05). Additionally, the absence of RAPD was associated with improved postoperative visual acuity (OR: 0.0675; 95% CI, 0.0354–0.706, p<0.05). Conclusions: Endoscopic endonasal approach can achieve good visual outcome in patients harboring suprasellar meningiomas. Symptom duration of less than six months and absence of RAPD were positive predictor of postoperative visual outcome.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".