MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401866647 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0000000000000311

Dynamic Article

2015· article· en· W2401866647 on OpenAlexaff
Alyson B. Crawford, Ilun Yang, Robert Wu, Husein Moloo, Robin P. Boushey

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMinimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityJuravinski HospitalUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryLaparoscopic surgeryEndoscopyEndoscopic mucosal resectionDysplasiaRetrospective cohort studyLaparoscopyColorectal surgeryGeneral surgeryAbdominal surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery is a novel technique that can be used to avoid bowel resection for complex colon polyps that are not amenable to colonoscopic resection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcomes of combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for complex colonic polyps. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of consecutive combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgeries. SETTING: This study was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: All patients that underwent combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for a complex colonic polyp at our center from October 2009 to October 2013 were followed. Each patient's lesion was assessed by a therapeutic endoscopist before referral for combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery, and was deemed unresectable based on size, broad base, or location of the polyp. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraoperative and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and recurrence were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: Thirty consecutive patients underwent combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery. Twenty (66.7%) patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polyp excision (10 of these excisions were facilitated by Endoloop placement at the polyp base), 9 (30%) patients underwent colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic cecectomy, and 1 (3.3%) patient was converted from a colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic cecectomy to a laparoscopic ileocolic resection. The median length of hospital stay was 2 days (range, 1-16). Twenty-nine (96.7%) of the final pathology results were benign, with 10 (33.3%) showing high-grade dysplasia. One (3.3%) final pathology result was positive for a well-differentiated adenocarcinoma. This patient subsequently underwent a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and chemotherapy for node-positive disease. One (3.3%) patient experienced a recurrent benign polyp at the previous excision site, which was removed by colonoscopy. The time to detection of recurrence was 274 days. LIMITATIONS: This study looked at a small group of patients, over a short follow-up period. However, all consecutive patients were captured, and there were no losses to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for complex benign colonic polyps is a safe procedure, with good clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6080.433

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.278 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesFrench-language works237,207