MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391042150 · doi:10.3171/2023.11.peds23364

Complications following resection of primary and recurrent pediatric posterior fossa ependymoma

2024· article· en· W4391042150 on OpenAlexaffabout
Armaan K. Malhotra, Liana Nobre, George M. Ibrahim, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, James M. Drake, James T. Rutka, Michael D. Taylor, Vijay Ramaswamy, Peter B. Dirks, Michael C. Dewan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpendymomaSurgeryHydrocephalusComplicationRetrospective cohort studyPosterior cranial fossaCohortInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Extent of resection (EOR) is the most important modifiable prognostic variable for pediatric patients with posterior fossa ependymoma. An understanding of primary and recurrent ependymoma complications is essential to inform clinical decision-making for providers, patients, and families. In this study, the authors characterize postsurgical complications following resection of primary and recurrent pediatric posterior fossa ependymoma in a molecularly defined cohort. METHODS: The authors conducted a 20-year retrospective single-center review of pediatric patients undergoing resection of posterior fossa ependymoma at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada. Complications were dichotomized into major and minor groups; EOR was compared across complication categories. The association between complication occurrence with length of stay (LOS) and mortality was also assessed using multivariable regressions. RESULTS: There were 60 patients with primary resection included, 41 (68%) of whom were alive at the time of data collection. Gross-total resection was achieved in 33 (58%) of 57 patients at primary resection. There were no 30-day mortality events following primary and recurrent ependymoma resection. Following primary resection, 6 patients (10%) had posterior fossa syndrome (PFS) and 36 (60%) developed cranial neuropathies, 56% of which recovered within 1 year. One patient (1.7%) required a tracheostomy and 9 patients (15%) required gastrostomy tubes. There were 14 ventriculoperitoneal shunts (23%) inserted for postoperative hydrocephalus. Among recurrent cases, there were 48 recurrent resections performed in 24 patients. Complications included new cranial neuropathy in 10 patients (21%), of which 5 neuropathies resolved within 1 year. There were no cases of PFS following resection of recurrent ependymoma. Gastrostomy tube insertion was required in 3 patients (6.3%), and 1 patient (2.0%) required a tracheostomy. Given the differences in the location of tumor recurrence, a direct comparison between primary and recurrent resection complications was not feasible. Following multivariate analysis adjusting for sex, age, molecular status, and EOR, occurrence of major complications was found to be associated with prolonged LOS but not mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These results detail the spectrum of postsurgical morbidity following primary and recurrent posterior fossa ependymoma resection. The crude complication rate following resection of infratentorial recurrent ependymoma was lower than that of primary ependymoma, although a statistical comparison revealed no significant differences between the groups. These results should serve to inform providers of the morbidity profile following surgical management of posterior fossa ependymoma and inform perioperative counseling of patients and their families.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207