Treatment of hepatic hydatid disease complications using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liver hydatidosis may lead to serious morbidity due to biliary complications, the management for which endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) and biliary drainage are very efficient. We evaluated the effectiveness of endoscopic treatment for complications of hepatic hydatid disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures performed between January 2000 and December 2009 and compared laboratory findings, localization of the lesions and ERCP procedures applied between patients with and without jaundice. RESULTS: In all, 70 ERCP procedures were performed in 54 patients (24 men, 30 women). Of the 70 procedures, 24 were performed to treat jaundice. All patients with biliary fistulas and jaundice were managed with endoscopic procedures. The 70 ERCP procedures included sphincterotomy only (n = 40); sphincterotomy and stent placement (n = 7); stent placement only (n = 4); sphincterotomy and membrane extraction (n = 9); sphincterotomy, membrane extraction and pus drainage (n = 5); and sphincterotomy and pus drainage (n = 5). Laboratory results improved in 3-7 days, and bile leakage ceased in 2-21 days. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is a safe and effective way to manage biliary complications of hepatic echinococcal disease. In most patients, ES is the most efficient treatment of postoperative external biliary fistulas, jaundice and accompanying cholangitis, as it enables clearing the bile ducts of hydatid remnants; ES should be performed since it accelerates the healing process by decreasing pressure in the choledochus.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".