Metastasis of Oropharyngeal Carcinoma to the Site of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy: Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) are relatively uncommon. PEG site metastases are iatrogenic complications of PEG tube placement. The literature search revealed only a few descriptions of tumor implantation at the PEG site. The patient is a 62-year-old male with a history of alcoholism and tobacco abuse. He was diagnosed with stage IV (T4 N2M0) squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the piriform recess. A PEG tube was placed and he underwent wide resection of aerodigestive tract. One year later, the patient mentioned a granulation tissue forming around the tube site. An en bloc resection of the abdominal wall was performed. The postoperative histopathological findings were in accordance with the diagnosis of SCC. Herein, an extremely rare case of metastasis of an oropharyngeal cancer at a PEG stoma is described . Multiple theories of metastatic spread have been proposed. T he mean time to PEG site implantation was 8 months after insertion. In patients of whom the interval between PEG placement and diagn osis of metastasis was 1 ye ar, Douglas et al concluded that hem atogenous spread is less likely than direct implantation of cells. The exact mechanism of abdominal wall metastasis in our patient still remains unclear. In our case, the time to PEG site implantation was 1 year and lymph nodes were invaded before PEG placement (T4 N2M0). Metastatic cancer should be evoked when skin changes at the PEG site in patients with head-and-neck cancer. J Curr Surg. 2014;4(2):46-48 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jcs223w
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".