MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076918582 · doi:10.1093/jscr/2012.8.13

Pancreas-sparing duodenectomy for an obstructive adenocarcinoma of the duodenum

2012· article· en· W2076918582 on OpenAlexaff
Dennis S.C. Lam, Kristopher P. Croome, Roberto Hernandez‐Alejandro

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Case Reports · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDuodenumPancreaticoduodenectomyAdenocarcinomaPancreasDuodenal cancerWhipple ProcedureDissection (medical)SurgeryAnastomosisLymph nodeGeneral surgeryInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A duodenal adenocarcinoma arising from the junction of the second and third portion of the duodenum, which was resected by pancreas-sparing duodenectomy, is reported. The completely obstructing tumour was circumferential and measured 6.5cm x 3.5cm x 1.0 cm. There was no evidence of pancreas invasion, nor any lymph node metastasis. Pancreas-sparing duodenectomy was performed, with dissection of the pancreaticoduodenal lymph nodes. The proximal duodenum was transected just distal to the ampula of Vater and jejunum was transected just distal to the ligament of Treitz. A hand-sewn side-to-side anastomosis for the duodenojejunostomy was performed. There were no postoperative complications. Pathology reported a duodenal adenocarcinoma resected with negative margins. Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the treatment of choice for a duodenal adenocarcinoma, however, pancreas-sparing duodenectomy may be a safe alternative for duodenal tumours not involving the 2(nd) portion, especially in elderly patients with multiple medical comorbidities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical Case ReportsSame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207