Surgical Treatment of Complications of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, including Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surgery for drug-resistant tuberculosis has been shown to be safe and effective, with similar level of mortalities associated with surgical intervention observed with that for lung cancer. While surgery has been an option to treat TB in the pre-antibiotic era, it is now increasingly used to treat complications of pulmonary TB, particularly in patients with drug-resistant TB who do not respond to medical treatment. The two most frequent indications for lung resection in drug- resistant TB, are i) failed medical treatment with persistent sputum positivity or ii) patients who have had medical treatment and are sputum negative, but with persistent localized cavitary disease or bronchiectasis. Massive hemoptysis is a potentially life-threatening complication of TB. Lung resection is potentially curative in patients with massive hemoptysis and cavitary or bronchiectatic disease. Bronchial artery embolization in these patients has a high success rate but bears also the risk of recurrence. Lung resection can be safely undertaken in selected patients with HIV co-infection and pulmonary complications of TB. Ambulatory drainage is a novel, safe, affordable and effective method of draining a chronic TB associated empyema thoracis. We review here the current surgical treatment of the complications of pulmonary TB and discuss the experience from the Durban Cardiothoracic Surgery Unit for the surgical treatment of patients with complicated pulmonary TB.
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 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) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".