The Right Lateral Position for Laparoscopic Diaphragmatic Hernia Repair in Pregnancy: Technique and Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maternal diaphragmatic hernia is a rare disorder of pregnancy. Laparoscopic repair of diaphragmatic hernias is gaining more and more consideration among the surgical community. To date, only a few centers have reported using the laparoscopic approach for diaphragmatic hernias occurring in pregnancy. As congenital diaphragmatic hernias occur mostly on the left side, a right lateral position would theoretically facilitate the surgery and would render an eventual simultaneous left thoracoscopy feasible without repositioning the patient. However, such a position in a pregnant woman has serious implications because of possible inferior vena cava compression by the gravid uterus. We performed a laparoscopic reduction and repair of a left foramen of Bochdalek hernia in a 26-week-pregnant patient, using a right lateral position. The right lateral position facilitated the procedure, without any adverse outcome for the fetus or the mother. This approach should be considered for any left diaphragmatic hernia repair occurring in pregnancy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".