Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Presenting as Surgical Emergencies: A Six-Patient Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent urgent exploratory laparotomy, and successful surgical resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Methods: Medical records were retrospectively searched from January 2005 to January 2012 for cases with gastrointestinal stromal tumors, who had undergone urgent exploratory laparotomy. Results: Of 51 patients operated for GISTs from January 2005 to January 2012, 6 cases had undergone urgent exploratory laparotomy and surgical resection. Our study group consisted of 4 female (66.6 %) and 2 male (33.4 %) patients with a median age of 60 years (range: 35-76 yrs). Their tumors were located in the stomach (n=1), jejunum (n=2), ileum (n=2), and rectum (n=1). For these tumors, total gastrectomy (n=1), segmental resection of the jejunum (n=2) or ileum (n=2), and left hemicolectomy (n=1) were performed followed by an uneventful postoperative course in all patients. According to Fletcher criteria, five tumors (83.3%) were classified as intermediate and high risk. No postoperative morbidity and mortality were noted. All patients received postoperative treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, imatinib. Median length of the hospital stay was 8 (range: 6 to 12) days. With a median follow-up of 32 (range 3 to 64) months, disease-free survival rate was 100 percent. Conclusions: Although quite rare, patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors may suffer from occult gastrointestinal hemorrhage and abdominal pain as the first clinical manifestations leading to urgent exploratory laparotomy and surgical extirpation of the tumor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".