Topical Mitomycin‐C Application in Recurrent Esophageal Strictures After Surgical Repair of Esophageal Atresia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and short-term safety of topical mitomycin-C, an antifibrotic agent, in preventing the recurrence of anastomotic strictures after surgical repair of esophageal atresia (EA). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with recurrent anastomotic strictures after EA surgery who underwent at least 3 esophageal dilations. We compared the outcome (ie, resolution of the stricture) of the group that received topical mitomycin-C treatment with endoscopic esophageal dilation with a historical cohort treated by dilations alone. RESULTS: A total of 11 children received mitomycin-C concurrently with endoscopic dilations. After a median follow-up of 33 months (range 18-72), and a mean number of 5.4 dilations per patient (range 3-11), 8 of 11 patients achieved a resolution of their strictures, 2 patients remained with stenosis, and 1 patient needed a surgical correction. In the control group, 10 patients required an average of 3.7 (range 3-7) total dilations. After a follow-up of 125 months (range 35-266) after the last dilation, strictures in 9 of 10 children disappeared and the remaining patient was symptom free. No dysplasia related to mitomycin-C was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: There is no benefit in the resolution of the stricture when adding mitomycin-C treatment compared with repeated esophageal dilations alone in historical controls. Further randomized controlled studies and a short- and long-term evaluation of safety are needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".