E-126 Current management of pulsatile tinnitus with venous causes. A large case series with mid- and long-term outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Pulsatile Tinnitus (PT) is a disabling condition that can be caused by vascular anomalies. The treatment of the underlying vascular conditions may improve the PT, restoring the quality of life of many patients. Purpose We aimed to investigate all vascular anomalies responsible for PT and their treatments, to assess the postoperative efficacy and the complication rate of endovascular treatments, as well as the influencing factors for recurrence. Materials and Methods We reviewed all patients treated for PT in our institution between January 2020 and December 2021. We reviewed all clinical and imaging data, pre- and post-procedure, and patient outcomes to explore treatment efficacy and peri-operative morbimortality. Results We included 114 patients in this study. All patients had undergone venous endovascular interventions for PT, 77% were women and 23% were men, with an average age of 52.0±15.0 years. Treatment strategies included: 53.8% venous sinus stenting (75% unilateral and 25% bilateral), 30.8% collateral venous occlusion by coiling (75% with the use of liquid embolic agent and 25% without additional agents), and 7.8% in combined stenting and coiling. The causes of PT included: intracranial stenosis in 63.3% (84.2% stenosis alone and 15.8% associated with prominent emissary veins), a high riding jugular bulb in 10% (33.3% isolated and 66.7% associated with diverticulum), prominent emissary veins in 13.3%, and an associated AVF in 13.3% of patients. No intraprocedural complications were reported. There were 2.3% of transitory peri-procedural complications. No permanent morbidity or mortality was observed. Conclusion Endovascular treatment is a safe and effective treatment for venous causes of pulsatile tinnitus, achieving resolution of PT with low morbidity. Disclosures A. Rustici: None. N. Cancelliere: None. T. Marotta: None. J. Spears: None. V. Mendes Pereira: None.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".