MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W120014193 · doi:10.1155/2005/439519

Has the Introduction of Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy Altered the Treatment Paradigm of Achalasia?

2005· article· en· W120014193 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lorenzo Ferri, Liane S. Feldman, Donna Stanbridge, Serge Mayrand, Gerald M. Fried

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchalasiaMyotomyMedicineHeller myotomySurgeryBotulinum toxinPopulationGeneral surgeryEsophagus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although surgical myotomy is well established as the most effective and durable treatment for achalasia, wide acceptance of this procedure as a first-line treatment has been hampered by perceived invasiveness and morbidity. Laparoscopic myotomy has significantly reduced surgical trauma and morbidity while maintaining effectiveness. The effect of laparoscopic myotomy on the treatment pattern for achalasia is not currently known. All patients undergoing surgical myotomy in Quebec from 1997 to 2002 were identified from the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec billing database; previous endoscopic treatment was documented from 1990 to the time of surgery. Patients were divided into two groups (prelaparoscopy and postlaparoscopy) defined by the approximate date when laparoscopic myotomy became generally available in Quebec. A questionnaire examining treatment preference for achalasia was sent to all Quebec gastroenterologists. The number of myotomies performed in Quebec remained stable (prelaparoscopy = 28.7/year; postlaparoscopy = 33/year), but were performed on an older population. The rate of preoperative endoscopic treatment did not differ from prelaparoscopy (29.2%) to postlaparoscopy (23.3%). However, the time interval between the last endoscopy and myotomy diminished significantly. Questionnaire response rate was 41% (60 of 147). Although myotomy was recognized as the most effective treatment (54 of 60), only 22 of 60 gastroenterologists would refer a healthy patient for myotomy as initial treatment. Other choices included dilation (33 of 60), Botulinum toxin (two of 60) or calcium channel blockade (three of 60). Despite a decrease in time interval between endoscopic treatment and surgery, no decrease in the rate of existing endoscopic therapies occurred after laparoscopic myotomy became widely available. The benefits and minimal risks associated with laparoscopic myotomy need to be more effectively communicated by referring physicians.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207