Mucosal Damage in the Esophageal Remnant After Esophagectomy and Gastric Transposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess development of mucosal damage in the esophageal remnant in regard to the level of the esophagogastrostomy reconstruction either in a right chest or in a left neck position. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Esophagectomy with gastric interposition creates an in vivo human model of pathologic esophageal reflux with the potential for long-term reflux disease complications. METHODS: Eighty-four esophagectomy patients were assessed over time by symptoms, endoscopy and biopsies of their esophageal remnant after the operation. The anastomosis was in the right upper chest (n = 36) or in a left cervical position (n = 48). Visual quantification of damage, details of histopathology, and time period since surgery were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (81%) with a right chest reconstruction had reflux symptoms when compared with 25 patients (53%) with a neck reconstruction (P = 0.007). Visualized reflux esophagitis was observed in 31 patients (81%) with chest anastomoses and in 22 patients (46%) with cervical anastomoses (P = 0.006). Documented mucosal damage and columnar lined metaplasia were significantly more frequent in the chest anastomosis group than the cervical group. The median of all mucosal damage and columnar lined metaplastic-free evolution were 13 +/- 3 and 20.5 +/- 6 months for the intrathoracic anastomosis, and 22 +/- 6 months and 40 +/- 8 months for the cervical anastomosis (P = 0.087). Two factors affecting the development of metaplasia were included in the multivariate analysis: an intrathoracic anastomosis (P = 0.018) and the presence of a previous Barrett esophagus (P = 0.064). CONCLUSIONS: When a gastric transplant is used after esophagectomy, a high prevalence of mucosal damage is observed in the esophageal remnant independently of the level of reconstruction. A left cervical anastomosis favors less reflux symptoms, less visualized damage, and delays the development of mucosal damage over time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".