Hyperamylasemia and pancreatitis following spiral enteroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis is a significant potential complication with double-balloon enteroscopy. Hyperamylasemia is frequently observed after both double-balloon enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy but often without associated pancreatitis. Whether the same phenomenon occurs with spiral enteroscopy is currently unknown. AIMS: To determine the incidence of pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia following spiral enteroscopy. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing proximal spiral enteroscopy was conducted. Serum amylase levels were measured immediately before and following the procedure, combined with observation for clinical signs of pancreatitis. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients underwent proximal spiral enteroscopy, with a mean total procedure time of 51 min (range 30 min to 100 min) and mean depth of insertion of 240 cm (range 50 cm to 350 cm). The diagnostic yield was 50%, with 31% of all procedures being therapeutic. While no patients exhibited signs that raised suspicion of pancreatitis, hyperamylasemia was common (20%). Hyperamylasemia was not significantly associated with procedure duration or depth of insertion but was linked to patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome and with the use of propofol sedation, suggesting that it may be more common in difficult cases. CONCLUSIONS: Postprocedural hyperamylasemia occurred frequently with proximal spiral enteroscopy, while no associated pancreatitis was observed. This finding suggests that hyperamylasemia may not necessarily reflect pancreatic injury nor portend a risk for pancreatitis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".