MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416383491 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2025.10476

Clinical Outcomes of Extended Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for the Resection of Anterior Skull Base Meningiomas

2025· article· en· W4416383491 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alejandro Vargas-Moreno, Sami Khairy, M Saymeh, Jessica Rabski, Shaun Kilty

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResectionSkullMeningiomaBase (topology)Selection (genetic algorithm)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Anterior skull base meningiomas account for 6% to 13% of all meningiomas. The extended endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) to these meningiomas offers many advantages such as early devascularization, adequate tumor resection and preservation of neurovascular structures. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing EEA for anterior skull base meningiomas, including recurrence rate and prognostic factors. METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted on adult patients who underwent EEA for anterior skull base meningiomas at The Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus between October 2014 and October 2023. RESULTS: ). Mean surgical duration was 351 minutes, and mean blood loss was 472 ml. A nasoseptal flap was used in 92% of cases. CSF leaks occurred in four cases (16%) and were managed with lumbar drainage. Total or near-total resection was achieved in 87.5% of OG cases and 82.4% of TS cases. Subtotal resections were significantly associated with larger tumor volumes (p = 0.03). Most of our cohort's histopathological findings were World Health Organization grade I meningiomas (92%). Our mean follow-up was 5.56 years and tumor recurrence was seen in one patient. CONCLUSION: Extended EEA for anterior skull base meningiomas is a safe and effective technique enabling total resection with a low recurrence rate. Optimal patient selection and multilayered reconstruction are critical to minimize complications.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.344
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 designObservational
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMeningioma and schwannoma management→French-language works237,207→