MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077957195 · doi:10.1503/cjs.013010

Postoperative recurrence of cystic hydatidosis

2012· article· en· W2077957195 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParasitic infections in humans and animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryHydatid cystCystRadical surgeryEchinococcosisAlbendazoleMedical recordGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surgical management is the basic treatment for hydatid disease. Overall, the recurrence rate appears to be high (4.6%-22.0%). The purpose of this study was to report our results in the management of recurrent hydatid disease, evaluating the methods for identifying recurrence, prognostic factors and therapeutic options. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent surgery for cystic hydatidosis between 1970 and 2003. RESULTS: Of the 584 patients who underwent surgery during our study period, follow-up was complete for 484 (82.8%). Cysts recurred in 51 patients (8.7%). Abdominal ultrasonography and computed tomography appeared to be efficient for diagnosing recurrence. The 2 most important determinants for recurrence were minute spillage of the hydatid cyst and inadequate treatment owing to missing cysts or incomplete pericystectomy. All but 2 recurrences required surgery. There were 14 postoperative complications for a rate of 27.0%. Thirteen re-recurrences were observed in the follow-up of these patients and also required surgery. CONCLUSION: Avoidance of minute spillage of cyst contents and cautious removal of the parasite with as much of the pericyst as possible are fundamental objectives of primary-hydatid surgery. Conservative surgery (removal of the cyst contents plus partial pericystectomy with drainage when necessary) plus chemotherapy and local sterilization is suggested for both primary and secondary operations and appears to achieve satisfactory longterm results. Radical surgery (resection, cystopericystectomy) is preferred only in select patients.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.233 · 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