Suspected Calvarial Hyperostosis Syndrome Causing Different Ophthalmological Signs in Two Young Labrador Retrievers—Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe calvarial hyperostosis syndrome (CHS) as a potential and unusual cause of exophthalmos or epiphora in young dogs. ANIMALS STUDIED: A nine-month-old female intact (case 1) and a two-year-old male intact Labrador Retriever (case 2). PROCEDURES: Patient history, including previous treatments, was documented. Both cases underwent physical and ophthalmological examinations, computed Tomography (CT), and histopathological analysis. Additional dacryocystorhinography (DCR) was performed in case 2. RESULTS: Lateral exophthalmos of the left eye was the primary clinical sign in case 1. In case 2, serous lacrimal discharge was observed without other signs of ocular irritation. A slightly thickened and firm area distal to the medial canthus of the right eye was also noted. In this case, Jones 1 test on the right side was negative, whereas Jones test 2 revealed increased resistance when flushing the nasolacrimal system. CT imaging in both cases identified solid, smoothly marginated new bone formation. In case 1, this involved the left frontal bone, occipital bone, parietal bone, and temporal bone. In case 2, the new bone formation affected the right lacrimal bone and frontal process of the maxillary bone, leading to encasement and narrowing of the nasolacrimal duct (NLD). Histopathological analysis revealed active bone remodeling with osteoblasts in case 1, while case 2 demonstrated regularly differentiated trabecular lamellar bone with intertrabecular spaces. No evidence of neoplasia or osteomyelitis was observed in either case. Taken together, these findings strongly support a diagnosis of CHS in both cases. CONCLUSIONS: CHS involving flat bones can present as exophthalmos or epiphora and should be considered in the differential diagnoses of these conditions, particularly in young dogs.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".