Self-Expandable Metal Stents in Palliation of Inoperable Esophageal & Gastro-Oesophageal Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Most of patients with carcinoma of the esophagus are inoperable at the time of presentation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of self expandable metal stents for the treatment of malignant dysphagia. Material & Methods: This study was conducted at Assiut University, Egypt from July 2009 to Dec 2011. Twenty Enrolled patients with grade 3 or 4 dysphagia due to inoperable carcinoma of the esophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction underwent Self Expandable Metal Stenting under endoscopic guidance. They were followed during all the study period. Dysphagia score will be calculated at baseline and at follow up according to Atkinson’s scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 16. Results: Mean age of patients was 55.5±15 years with male to female ratio of 3:2. Mean dysphagia score improved from 3.4 (pre-stent) to 1.07 (post-stent) (p <0.05). Improvement in dysphagia (conversion of grade 3 or 4 dysphagia into grade 1 or 0) was seen in 90% of patients. Eight patients required re-intervention after initial improvement for their stent blockage (40%) and two patients followed conservatively for stent migration (10%). Other minor complications like cough and regurgitation occurred in 10% and 40% patients respectively. Most patients experienced severe chest pain necessitating narcotic analgesics. One patient with pulmonary metastasis died within one week, three patients died within 3months, ten patients died within 1.5 years and six patients under flow-up until now. Conclusion: Self expandable metal stents are an effective method for palliation of dysphagia but not without 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".