MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407119812 · doi:10.1097/moo.0000000000001036

Skull base osteoradionecrosis: from pathogenesis to treatment

2025· review· en· W4407119812 on OpenAlexaff
Vittorio Rampinelli, Gabriele Testa, Alberto Daniele Arosio, Cesare Piazza

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head & Neck Surgery · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOral health in cancer treatment
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoradionecrosisSkullPathogenesisMedicineBase (topology)AnatomyRadiation therapySurgeryPathologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of skull base osteoradionecrosis (ORN), a severe and rare complication of radiotherapy for head and neck malignancies. It explores pathogenesis, clinical presentation, diagnostic strategies, and management approaches, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary care in addressing this challenging condition. RECENT FINDINGS: Skull base ORN results from radiotherapy-induced tissue damage, characterized by hypovascularity, hypoxia, and necrosis, often compounded by secondary infections. Advances in radiotherapy techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and heavy particles, have reduced ORN incidence, though cases persist, particularly in high-dose radiotherapy fields. Emerging treatments, including hyperbaric oxygen therapy and the pentoxifylline-tocopherol protocol, show promise but lack robust evidence for standardized use. Surgical interventions, especially those incorporating vascularized tissue reconstruction, have demonstrated favorable outcomes in refractory cases. Recent studies underscore the utility of multimodal imaging techniques, including MRI and PET/CT, for distinguishing ORN from tumor recurrence. SUMMARY: Skull base ORN represents a complex and potentially life-threatening condition requiring tailored, multidisciplinary management. Although advancements in diagnostics and therapeutics have improved outcomes, significant challenges remain, particularly in developing standardized protocols. Further research is needed to refine treatment strategies and improve evidence-based practices for this entity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head & Neck SurgerySame topicOral health in cancer treatmentFrench-language works237,207