MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099306194 · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4059

Palliative Surgery for Malignant Bowel Obstruction From Carcinomatosis

2014· review· en· W2099306194 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Terrah J. Paul Olson, Carolyn Pinkerton, Karen J. Brasel, Margaret L. Schwarze

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Surgery · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicinePeritoneal carcinomatosisBowel obstructionPalliative careCochrane LibrarySurgeryPercutaneousGeneral surgeryColorectal cancerCancerInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Care of patients with malignant bowel obstruction caused by peritoneal metastases may present an ethical dilemma for surgeons when nonoperative management fails. OBJECTIVE: To characterize outcomes of palliative surgery for malignant bowel obstruction from peritoneal carcinomatosis to guide decision making about surgery and postoperative interventions for patients with terminal illness. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus, and Google Scholar and performed manual searches of selected journals from inception to August 30, 2012, with no filters, limits, or language restrictions. We used database-specific combinations of the terms intestinal obstruction, malignant, surgery or surgical, and palliat*. We included studies reporting outcomes after palliative surgery for malignant bowel obstruction from peritoneal carcinomatosis from any primary malignant neoplasm and excluded case studies, curative surgery, isolated percutaneous procedures, stenting for intraluminal lesions, and studies in which benign and malignant obstructions could not be distinguished. We assessed quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. FINDINGS: We screened 2347 unique articles, selected 108 articles for full-text review, and included 17 studies. Surgery was able to palliate obstructive symptoms for 32% to 100% of patients, enable resumption of a diet for 45% to 75% of patients, and facilitate discharge to home in 34% to 87% of patients. Mortality was high (6%-32%), and serious complications were common (7%-44%). Frequent reobstructions (6%-47%), readmissions (38%-74%), and reoperations (2%-15%) occurred. Survival was limited (median, 26-273 days), and hospitalization for surgery consumed a substantial portion of the patient's remaining life (11%-61%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although palliative surgery can benefit patients, it comes at the cost of high mortality and substantial hospitalization relative to the patient's remaining survival time. Preoperatively, surgeons should present realistic goals and limitations of surgery. For patients choosing surgery, clarifying preferences for aggressive postoperative interventions preoperatively is critical given the high complication rate and limited survival after surgery for malignant bowel obstruction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations216
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA SurgerySame topicIntestinal and Peritoneal AdhesionsFrench-language works237,207