MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413341150 · doi:10.3171/case25274

Prenatal diagnosis and conservative management of a congenital cavernous sinus infantile hemangioma: illustrative case

2025· article· en· W4413341150 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Roberge, Nalla Silva Baticam, Stéphanie Vairy, Mireille Dubé, Niina Kleiber, Thai Hoa Tran, Louis Crevier, Samuele Renzi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Case Lessons · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemangiomaConservative managementPrenatal diagnosisSurgeryPregnancyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Infantile hemangiomas (IHs) are the most common benign vascular tumors of infancy, although intracranial IHs remain exceedingly rare. Diagnosis is typically postnatal, with some cases requiring medical or surgical intervention. Here, the authors report the first case of a congenital cavernous sinus IH diagnosed via prenatal imaging and managed conservatively with successful spontaneous regression. OBSERVATIONS: A 28-year-old female underwent routine fetal ultrasound at 32 weeks' gestation, revealing a 1.8-cm perithalamic lesion. Fetal MRI at 33 weeks confirmed an extra-axial mass in the right middle fossa with a dural attachment. Postnatal MRI on day 1 of life demonstrated imaging features consistent with an IH. Given the neonate's asymptomatic status, conservative management was pursued. Serial MRI at 10 weeks and 6 months showed progressive lesion regression, with near-complete resolution. The infant remained asymptomatic with normal neurodevelopmental progress. LESSONS: This case highlights the potential for spontaneous regression of congenital intracranial IHs diagnosed prenatally. Despite the risk of bleeding, conservative management with close clinical and radiological follow-up may be a viable option in select asymptomatic cases, particularly in the neonatal period when surgical risks are significant. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE25274.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery Case LessonsSame topicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207