Adult Intussusception: A Retrospective Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Whereas intussusception is relatively common in children, it is clinically rare in adults. The condition is usually secondary to a definable lesion. This study was designed to review adult intussusception, including presentation, diagnosis, and optimal treatment. METHODS: A retrospective review of 22 cases of intussusception occurring in individuals older than aged 18 years encountered at two university-affiliated hospitals in Winnipeg between 1989 and 2000. The 22 cases were divided to benign and malignant enteric, ileocolic, colonic lesions respectively. The diagnosis and treatment of each case were reviewed. RESULTS: There were 22 cases of adult intussusception. Mean age was 57.1 years. Abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting were the commonest symptoms. There were 14 enteric, 2 ileocolic, and 6 colonic intussusceptions. Eighty-six percent of adult intussusception was associated with a definable lesion. Twenty-nine percent of enteric lesions were malignant. All ileocolic lesions were malignant. Of colonic lesions, 33 percent were malignant and 67 percent were benign. All cases required surgical interventions except one. CONCLUSIONS: Adult intussusception is a rare entity and requires a high index of suspicion. Our review supports that small-bowel intussusception should be reduced before resection if the underlying etiology is suspected to be benign or if the resection required without reduction is deemed to be massive. Large bowel should generally be resected without reduction because pathology is mostly malignant.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".