Advanced Laparoscopic Surgery in a Free-Standing Ambulatory Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To decrease the impact and cost of surgery, there is a trend toward developing treatment models for complex conditions on a fully outpatient basis. This is a retrospective study of the initial experience of advanced laparoscopic procedures performed on a same-day outpatient basis in the ambulatory campus of a university hospital. Over 3 years, 55 patients underwent 50 Nissen fundoplications and 5 adrenalectomies. There were 2 intraoperative complications, with no mortality and no conversion. The median postoperative stay was 4.5 hours. Readmission at 1 month was 11%. Data on the nursing postoperative telephone follow-up were available for 50 patients; 34 (62%) were successfully contacted. Twenty four (70%) had no complaint. Preliminary high-level cost data indicate a cost advantage. Advanced laparoscopic procedures can be done safely in a pure ambulatory setting; the current readmission rate can be reduced with improved pain management and better telephone follow-up strategies. Cost savings are likely.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".