P.171 Intradural-extramedullary spinal cavernoma with nerve root association: a case report and review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although 5% of cavernomas occur in the spine, intradural-extramedullary cavernomas are exceptionally rare. We present one such case of cavernoma associated exclusively with a nerve root, and review the literature for similar lesions. Methods: Case Report. A 45-year old male patient presented with a six-month history of numbness and paresthesia affecting his lower extremities bilaterally. MRI demonstrated a 16mm intradural-extramedullary lesion at T3-4, compressing the cord. The lesion was surgically removed en-bloc, requiring root sacrifice. The patient’s symptoms completely resolved post-operatively, and he remained asymptomatic at 3-month follow up. Results: Including the present case, 71 cases of intradural-extramedullary spinal cavernoma have been reported, including 50 with confirmed nerve root involvement. Patients most frequently presented between the ages of 40-59 (41%) with lesions at the lumbar level (54%). Confirmed subarachnoid hemorrhage was present in 14% at presentation, although 23% presented acutely. 49% presented with longstanding/progressive symptoms, and 11% with mixed acute-on-chronic presentation. 37% presented primarily with radiculopathy, 21% with myelopathy, and 11% with pain. Good postoperative recovery was documented in 80% of cases. Conclusions: Intradural-extramedullary spinal cavernomas may demonstrate a propensity for radiculopathy at presentation and exhibit substantial subarachnoid hemorrhage risk. Literature review supports the role of surgical resection.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".