Hemostatic powder TC-325 in the management of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a two-year experience at a single institution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: TC-325 is a novel endoscopic hemostatic powder. Our aim was to describe a single-center experience with the use of TC-325 in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract, while for the first time attempting to determine how long the powder remains on a lesion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The charts of consecutive patients receiving TC-325 therapy between July 2011 and July 2013 were reviewed retrospectively. Primary endpoints included immediate hemostasis and early rebleeding (≤ 72 hours). RESULTS: Overall, 60 patients received 67 treatments with TC-325: 21 for nonmalignant nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, 19 for malignant upper gastrointestinal bleeding, 11 for lower gastrointestinal bleeding, and 16 for intra-procedural bleeding. Immediate hemostasis was achieved in 66 cases (98.5 %), with 6 cases (9.5 %) of early rebleeding. No serious adverse events were noted. No TC-325 powder was identified in the 11 patients who underwent second-look endoscopy, performed within 24 hours in 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: TC-325 appears safe and effective for managing bleeding in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract with a variety of causes. The time during which the powder remains in the gastrointestinal tract is short, with complete elimination from the gastrointestinal tract as early as within 24 hours after use.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".