International Survey on the Management of Esophageal Atresia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Because many aspects of the management of esophageal atresia (EA) are still controversial, we evaluated the practice patterns of this condition across Europe. METHODS: A survey was completed by 178 delegates (from 45 [27 European] countries; 88% senior respondents) at the EUPSA-BAPS 2012. RESULTS: Approximately 66% of respondents work in centers where more than five EA repairs are performed per year. Preoperatively, 81% of respondents request an echocardiogram, and only 43% of respondents routinely perform preoperative bronchoscopy. Approximately 94% of respondents prefer an open approach, which is extrapleural in 71% of respondents. There were no differences in use of thoracoscopy between Europeans (10%) and non-Europeans (11%, p = nonsignificant). Approximately 60% of respondents measure the gap intraoperatively. A transanastomotic tube (90%) and chest drain (69%) are left in situ. Elective paralysis is adopted by 56% of respondents mainly for anastomosis tension (65%). About 72% of respondents routinely request a contrast study on postoperative day 7 (2-14). Approximately 54% of respondents use parenteral nutrition, 40% of respondents start transanastomotic feeds on postoperative day 1, and 89% of respondents start oral feeds after postoperative day 5. Pure EA: 46% of respondents work in centers that repair two or more than two pure EA a year. About 60% of respondents opt for delayed primary anastomosis at 3 months (1-12 months) with gastrostomy formation without esophagostomy. Anastomosis is achieved with open approach by 85% of respondents. About 47% of respondents attempt elongation of esophageal ends via Foker technique (43%) or with serial dilations with bougies (41%). Approximately 67% of respondents always attempt an anastomosis. Gastric interposition is the commonest esophageal substitution. CONCLUSION: Many aspects of EA management are lacking consensus. Minimally invasive repair is still sporadic. We recommend establishment of an EA registry.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it