Surgical management of intracranial hypertension in rickets-related craniosynostosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Hypophosphatemic ricket is occasionally associated with craniosynostosis. • Sinus pericranii is a rare radiological manifestation of intracranial hypertension. • Bilateral cranial expansion may be effective in normalizing intracranial pressure. Hypophosphatemic rickets is occasionally associated with craniosynostosis. Delayed diagnosis can result in intracranial hypertension, potentially leading to serious neurological complications. We report the case of a 9-year-old boy with X-linked hypophosphatemic rickets who presented with headache, fundus oculi edema, and double sinus pericranii. A CT scan revealed fusion of the cranial sutures, and continuous intracranial pressure monitoring confirmed intracranial hypertension. The patient successfully underwent bilateral cranial expansion. Secondary craniosynostosis is a rare condition, with hypophosphatemic rickets being the most common metabolic cause. Sinus pericranii is a rare radiological manifestation of intracranial hypertension. Craniosynostosis presenting after infancy or early childhood should prompt consideration of secondary or metabolic causes. Regular monitoring for head shape abnormalities and signs of intracranial hypertension is essential in patients with hypophosphatemic rickets. Skull expansion is an effective therapeutic option.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".