End-to-end ductal anastomosis in biliary reconstruction: indications and limitations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
End-to-end ductal anastomosis is a physiologic biliary reconstruction that is commonly used in liver transplantation and less frequently in the surgical treatment of iatrogenic bile duct injuries. Currently, end-to-end ductal anastomosis is the biliary reconstruction of choice for liver transplantation in most adult patients. In recent years, it has also been performed for liver transplantation in children and in select patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. The procedure is also performed in some patients with iatrogenic bile duct injuries, as it establishes physiologic bile flow. Proper digestion and absorption as well as postoperative endoscopic access are possible in patients who undergo end-to-end ductal anastomosis. It allows endoscopic diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients following surgery. This anastomosis is technically simple and associated with fewer early postoperative complications than the Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy; however, end-to-end ductal anastomosis is not possible to perform in all patients. This review discusses the indications for and limitations of this biliary reconstruction, the technique used in liver transplantation and surgical repair of injured bile ducts, suture types and use of a T-tube.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".