MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396682766 · doi:10.4253/wjge.v7.i5.518

Endoscopic management of bariatric complications: A review and update

2015· review· en· W2396682766 on OpenAlexaff
Caolan Walsh, Shahzeer Karmali

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityRoyal Alexandra Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeakComplicationSurgeryStenosisAnastomosisFistulaEndoscopyStentSleeve gastrectomySepsisEndoscopic stentingGeneral surgeryGastric bypassWeight lossRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With over a third of Americans being considered obese, bariatric procedures have now become the most performed operation be general surgeons in the United States. The most common operations are the Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, the Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy, and the Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band. With over 340000 bariatric procedures preformed worldwide in 2011, the absolute number of complications related to these operations is also increasing. Complications, although few, can be life threatening. One of the most dreaded acute complication is the anastomotic/staple line leak. If left undiagnosed or untreated they can lead to sepsis, multi organ failure, and death. Smaller or contained leaks can develop into fistulas. Although most patients with an acute anastomotic leak return to the operating room, there has been a trend to manage the stable patient with an endoscopic stent. They offer an advantage by creating a barrier between enteric content and the leak, and will allow the patients to resume enteral feeding much earlier. Fistulas are a complex and chronic complication with high morbidity and mortality. Postoperative bleeding although rare may also be treated locally with endoscopy. Stenosis is a more frequent late complication and is best-managed with endoscopic therapy. Stents may not heal every fistula or stenosis, however they may prevent certain patients the need for additional revisional surgery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Gastrointestinal EndoscopySame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207