Extreme Lateral Approach to the Craniocervical Junction, Operative Technique and Approach Essentials: 2-Dimensional Operative Video
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INDICATIONS CORRIDOR AND LIMITS OF EXPOSURE: The extreme lateral approach is useful for both extradural and intradural anterior and anterolateral lesions at the lower clivus down to the level of C2. ANATOMIC ESSENTIALS NEED FOR PREOPERATIVE PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT: The patient is evaluated with MRI, computed tomography (CT), and an angiogram. Special attention is given to vascular (vertebral artery course, dominance, tumor feeders) and bony (occipital condyle, jugular tubercle, foramen magnum and extent of bony involvement) anatomy. ESSENTIALS STEPS OF THE PROCEDURE: The patient is positioned lateral with the head flexed and tilted down without axial rotation. A hockey-stick incision is performed, and the myocutaneous flap is raised. A retrocondylar craniectomy is performed. The extradural vertebral artery is exposed for proximal control. A C1 hemilaminectomy is performed. Cephalad/caudal exposure and drilling of the occipital condyle are determined per case. The dura is opened, and the vertebral artery is released at the dural entry point to facilitate the tumor removal. The tumor is debulked and delivered inferoventrally away from the neuroaxis and cranial nerves. After removing the tumor, the dura is closed using an allograft.The patients consented to the procedure and to the publication of their images. PITFALLS/AVOIDANCE OF COMPLICATIONS: • Cranial nerve deficits• Craniocervical instability• Postoperative hydrocephalus• Postoperative pseudomeningocele. VARIANTS AND INDICATIONS FOR THEIR USE: A transmastoid extension of the craniectomy allows access further rostrally in the clivus. For C1-2 chordomas, the approach is extended inferiorly, and the vertebral artery is mobilized out of the C1-2 transverse foramina. For tumors involving the joints, an occipitocervical stabilization is required.Images in video reused with permission as follows: image at 00:16 from Revuelta Barbero et al, Endoscopic endonasal transclival-medial condylectomy approach for resection of a foramen magnum meningioma: 2-dimensional operative video, Oper Neurosurg , 16(2), 2018, by permission from the Congress of Neurological Surgery; images at 00:30, and top image at 00:52 reused from Wen et al, Microsurgical anatomy of the transcondylar, supracondylar, and paracondylar extensions of the far-lateral approach, J Neurosurg , 87(4), 1997, with permission from JNSPG; bottom images at 00:52 from Muthukumar et al, A morphometric analysis of the foramen magnum region as it relates to the transcondylar approach, Acta Neurochir , 147(8), 2005, by permission from Springer Nature.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".