Gastrectomy and Esophagogastrectomy for Proximal and Distal Gastric Lesions: A Comparison of Open and Laparoscopic Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laparoscopic gastrectomy is safe for benign lesions; however, such surgery for cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes in open versus laparoscopic gastrectomy. Data on patients undergoing open (n = 15) or laparoscopic (n = 52) gastrectomy revealed a mean age of 61.7 and 70.5 years, respectively (P = .06). Mean operative time was 32.3 minutes longer in the laparoscopic group (P = .24). The difference in median length of hospital stay was 3 days (open 12 days, laparoscopic 9 days). Postoperative morbidity (< 30 days) was not different; however, there were more early respiratory complications in the open group (P = .009). There were 4/6 (66.7%) open and 2/29 (6.9%) cancer recurrences. Laparoscopic approach for treatment of gastric lesions is safe and does not have a deleterious effect on cancer-related outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".