MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093186631 · doi:10.4021/gr2010.02.163w

Traumatic Transection of Pancreas at the Neck: Feasibility of Parenchymal Preserving Strategy

2010· article· en· W2093186631 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rudra Prasad Doley

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePancreasSurgeryJejunostomyBluntParenchymaAbdominal traumaPancreatic injuryInternal medicineParenteral nutrition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To assess the feasibility and safety of a pancreas preserving operative technique in the management of isolated complete pancreatic neck transection following blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: Two patients with isolated blunt fracture of the pancreatic neck underwent pancreas preserving procedure comprising of oversewing of the proximal pancreas and Roux-en-Y pancreatico jejunostomy to the distal remnant. A feeding jejunostomy tube was placed for postoperative nutritional support in these patients. Both patients received subcutaneous octreotide 300 µg/day. RESULTS: Their ages ranged from 15 years to 20 years, mode of injury was bicycle handle-bar injury (n = 2). Both had pancreatic transection at neck in the line of superior mesenteric vessels. One had ascites. These patients had pancreas parenchyma preserving surgery - internal drainage of the left remnant in a Roux-en-Y jejunal loop. The postoperative course was uneventful in these and both are well on follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreas preserving strategy - suture of head side of pancreas and an internal drainage of left remnant with a Roux-en-Y jejunal loop is feasible and safe and should be considered in selected cases. Substantial amount of normal pancreatic parenchyma is preserved.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207