Polymeric Biodegradable Stent Insertion in the Esophagus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esophageal stent insertion has been used as a well-accepted and effective alternative to manage and improve the quality of life for patients diagnosed with esophageal diseases and disorders. Current stents are either permanent or temporary and are fabricated from either metal or plastic. The partially covered self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) has a firm anchoring effect and prevent stent migration, however, the hyperplastic tissue reaction cause stent restenosis and make it difficult to remove. A fully covered SEMS and self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) reduced reactive hyperplasia but has a high migration rate. The main advantage that polymeric biodegradable stents (BDSs) have over metal or plastic stents is that removal is not require and reduce the need for repeated stent insertion. But the slightly lower radial force of BDS may be its main shortcoming and a post-implant problem. Thus, strengthening support of BDS is a content of the research in the future. BDSs are often temporarily effective in esophageal stricture to relieve dysphagia. In the future, it can be expect that biodegradable drug-eluting stents (DES) will be available to treat benign esophageal stricture, perforations or leaks with additional use as palliative modalities for treating malignant esophageal stricture, as the bridge to surgery or to maintain luminal patency during neoadjuvant chemoradiation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".