Outcomes of Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery for Tuberculum Sellae and Planum Sphenoidale Meningiomas: A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate clinical outcomes and volumetric changes following endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for tuberculum sellae (TS) and planum sphenoidale (PS) meningiomas. Key objectives included evaluating pre- and postoperative tumor volumes, visual assessments and EEA-related complications. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted at Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Canada, from 2009 to 2022 including 24 patients meeting inclusion criteria for midline skull base tumors, confirmed as WHO Grade I or II meningiomas with optic canal extension. RESULTS: EEA achieved gross total resection in 87.5% of cases, with a mean tumor volume reduction of 92.24%. Postoperatively, 91.67% exhibited visual improvement or stability. Cerebrospinal fluid leaks occurred in 12.5% of cases, necessitating revision surgery in one case. Persistent postoperative endocrine dysfunction affected 4.17%. Preoperative tumor volume did not demonstrate a correlation with complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study delivers reproducible data for pre- and postoperative tumor volume following the EEA after TS or PS meningiomas. The EEA demonstrated favorable radiographic and clinical outcomes in TS and PS meningiomas, achieving gross total resection with minimal morbidity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; 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".