Vascular conditioning of the stomach before esophageal reconstruction by gastric interposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gastric interposition with intrathoracic or cervical esophagogastrostomy is currently the preferred operation for reconstruction after esophagectomy. Anastomotic leaks however result from poor vascular supply to the proximal stomach. They are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. 'Ischemic conditioning' of the interposed stomach has been proposed as a technique where the 'delay phenomenon' aims at improving the microcirculation of the gastric conduit and preventing anastomotic leakage. Experimental observations and clinical studies have been conducted to document the immediate effects and results of this approach. The aim of this work is to review the principles, pathophysiology, experimental, and clinical evidence related to vascular conditioning of the stomach prior to esophagectomy with gastric interposition and esophagogastric anastomosis. MEDLINE and PubMed were searched to identify articles related to vascular conditioning of the stomach. Cross references were added and reviewed to complete the reference list. The anatomic basis of ischemic conditioning, the prevalence of ischemic events on the gastric conduit, the methodology to assess the microcirculation before and after gastric devascularization, animal experiments, and clinical studies reported on this approach were reviewed. Ten experimental works, eleven clinical observations, four reviews, and two editorial commentaries addressing ischemic conditioning of the stomach were identified and reviewed. Experimental observations document improved microcirculation to the proximal stomach following partial gastric devascularization. Clinical reports show the feasibility and relative safety of gastric ischemic conditioning. Preliminary observations suggest potential improvements to the gastric microcirculation resulting from gastric ischemic conditioning. This approach may help prevent complications at the esophagogastric anastomosis. The actual level of evidence however cannot promote its use outside of clinical research protocols.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".