Treatment for pancreatic abscesses via omentalization with abdominal closure versus open peritoneal drainage in dogs: 15 cases (1994–2004)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare survival rate, duration of hospitalization, and complications in dogs with pancreatic abscesses treated with omentalization with abdominal closure versus open peritoneal drainage and evaluate a pancreatitis severity score for potential prognostic value. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 15 dogs with pancreatic abscesses. PROCEDURE: Data regarding species, breed, age, initial clinical signs, CBC, serum biochemical abnormalities, pancreatitis severity score, anatomic location of the abscess, intraoperative bacteriologic culture results, treatment modality, postoperative complications, outcome (dismissed alive from the hospital, died in the postoperative period, or euthanized at surgery), and duration of hospitalization were evaluated. RESULTS: 6 dogs survived, 6 dogs died or were euthanized after surgery, and 3 were euthanized during surgery. Five of 8 dogs treated with omentalization and abdominal closure survived, and 1 of 4 dogs treated with open peritoneal drainage survived. In several dogs, treatment required additional surgical procedures, which did not appear to affect outcome. Postoperative complications were similar among survivors and nonsurvivors. Mean duration of hospitalization for dogs treated with omentalization and abdominal closure was less than that of dogs treated with open peritoneal drainage. Neither pancreatitis severity score nor any individual components of the score were associated with outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Omentalization is a viable treatment option for pancreatic abscess in dogs. Furthermore, shorter hospitalization and better survival outcomes may make omentalization preferred over open peritoneal drainage.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it