Repeat CyberKnife Radiosurgery for Trigeminal Neuralgia: Outcomes and Complications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: CyberKnife radiosurgery (RS), as an initial first treatment, is recognized as an efficient and safe modality for trigeminal neuralgia (TN). However, knowledge on repeat CyberKnife RS in refractory cases is limited. The objective was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of repeat CyberKnife RS for TN. METHODS: A retrospective review of 33 patients with refractory TN treated a second time with CyberKnife RS from 2009 to 2021. The median follow-up period after the second RS was 26.0 months (range 0.3-115.8). The median dose for the repeat RS was 60 Gy (range 60.0-70.0). Pain relief after the intervention was assessed using the Barrow Neurological Institute scale for pain (I-V). Scores I to IIIb were classified as an adequate pain relief and scores IV-V were classified as a treatment failure. RESULTS: After the second RS, initial adequate pain relief was achieved in 87.9% of cases. The actuarial probabilities of maintaining an adequate pain relief at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were 92.1%, 74.0%, 58.2%, and 58.2%, respectively. Regarding sustained pain relief, there was no significant difference between the first and the second RS. Sensory toxicity after the first RS was predictive of a better outcome following the second RS. The onset of hypesthesia rate was the same after the first or the second RS (21%). CONCLUSION: Repeat RS is an effective and safe method for the treatment of refractory TN.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".