Stricture associated with primary tracheoesophageal puncture after pharyngolaryngectomy and free jejunal interposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Free jejunal interposition has been one of the standard reconstructive options for patients undergoing total laryngopharyngoesophagectomy. Tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) done primarily is a well-accepted means of voice restoration. The rapid recovery of swallowing and communication in patients who have advanced cancer of the upper aerodigestive tract is a valid goal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the functionality and complications of primary TEP in patients with a free jejunal interposition graft. METHODS: Twenty-four consecutive patients who had free jejunal interposition were studied. Thirteen of these patients had a primary TEP. Stricture was assessed through barium swallow, laryngoscopy, and CT scan. RESULTS: A statistically significant greater number of patients had stricture develop after primary TEP (p < .0325). All these patients had stricture develop at the distal anastomosis. These patients also tended to have a poorer quality of diet. Moreover, speech with a TEP prosthesis in patients with a free jejunal interposition was less intelligible and functional than speech with a TEP prosthesis after simple laryngectomy. CONCLUSIONS: This article recognizes an increased incidence of stricture formation after primary TEP as compared with non-TEP in patients undergoing pharyngolaryngectomy with free jejunal interposition. The morbidity and possible etiology of this complication are discussed. This clinical data have been translated into a change in clinical practice.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".