NOTES for the management of an intra-abdominal abscess: transcolonic peritonoscopy and abscess drainage in a canine model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We studied natural orifice transcolonic drainage of intra-abdominal abscesses in a canine survival model to evaluate the difficulty of peritonoscopy and abscess drainage and the reliability of endoluminal colotomy closure. METHODS: We placed a 7 cm nonsterile saline-filled latex balloon intra-abdominally to mimic or induce an abscess or inflammatory mass. Seven days later, we advanced a single-channel endoscope transanally into the sigmoid colon of the animal, made a colotomy and then advanced the endoscope intraperitoneally. We evacuated the identified abscess and placed a drain transabdominally. We closed the colotomy endoluminally with a tissue approximation system using 2 polypropylene sutures attached to metal T-bars. Two weeks later, we evaluated the colotomy closure at laparotomy. RESULTS: We studied 12 dogs: 8 had subphrenic balloon implants and 4 had interbowel loop implants. Eleven survived and underwent transcolonic peritonoscopy; we identified the "abscess" in 9. The colotomy was successfully closed in 10 of 11 dogs. Although abscesses were easily identified, the overall difficulty of the peritonoscopy was moderate to severe. One dog required colotomy closure via laparotomy, while 9 had successful endoluminal closure. After colotomy closure, 8 animals survived for 2 weeks (study end point) without surgical complications, sepsis or localized abdominal infections. On postmortem examination, all closures were intact without any adjacent organ damage or procedure-related complications. CONCLUSION: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery provides a novel alternative to treating intra-abdominal pathology. It is technically feasible to perform endoscopic transcolonic peritonoscopy and drainage of an intra-abdominal abscess with reliable closure of the colotomy in a canine experimental model.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".