MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330602057 · doi:10.21037/acs.2016.03.05

Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: safety, efficacy and learning curve during the first 250 cases in Quebec, Canada

2016· article· en· W2330602057 on OpenAlex
Gabrielle Drevet, Paula A. Ugalde

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Cardiothoracic Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVATS lobectomyThoracotomySurgeryWedge resectionVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgeryLungResectionPneumonectomyLearning curveGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) using a single incision (uniportal) may result in better pain control, earlier mobilization and shorter hospital stays. Here, we review the safety and efficiency of our initial experience with uniportal VATS and evaluate our learning curve. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of uniportal VATS using a prospectively maintained departmental database and analyzed patients who had undergone a lung anatomic resection separately from patients who underwent other resections. To assess the learning curve, we compared the first 10 months of the study period with the second 10 months. RESULTS: From January 2014 to August 2015, 250 patients underwent intended uniportal VATS, including 180 lung anatomic resections (72%) and 70 other resections (28%). Lung anatomic resection was successfully completed using uniportal VATS in 153 patients (85%), which comprised all the anatomic segmentectomies (29 patients), 80% (4 of 5) of the pneumonectomies and 82% (120 of 146) of the lobectomies attempted. The majority of lung anatomic resections that required conversion to thoracotomy occurred in the first half of our study period. Seventy patients underwent other uniportal VATS resections. Wedge resections were the most common of these procedures (25 patients, 35.7%). Although 24 of the 70 patients (34%) required the placement of additional ports, none required conversion to thoracotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Uniportal VATS was safe and feasible for both standard and complex pulmonary resections. However, when used for pulmonary anatomic resections, uniportal VATS entails a steep learning curve.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it