Experience with a modified Gray-St. Louis catheter for percutaneous gastrojejunostomy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine if design modifications to the Gray-St. Louis gastrojejunostomy catheter would improve its deployment and utilization characteristics. METHODS: A modified catheter and the Gray-St. Louis catheter were alternately inserted in consecutive patients requiring gastrojejunostomy. At the time of insertion, the anatomic locations of the fenestrated end of the catheter and the Cope retention loop were recorded. At the time of removal or exchange, catheters were assessed for the position of the fenestrated end and the retention loop, the presence of catheter tears, leakage of injected contrast medium and evidence of catheter blockage. RESULTS: Of the 250 catheters we assessed in a 3-year period, 141 (56%) were modified catheters and 109 (44%) were Gray-St. Louis catheters. At insertion, the retention loop of the modified catheter was in the duodenum in 132 (94%) patients, whereas the retention loop of the Gray-St. Louis Catheter reached the duodenum in 29 (27%) (p < 0.05). At the time of catheter removal or exchange, the retention loop of the modified catheter was in the duodenum in 72 (60%) patients, whereas the retention loop of the Gray-St. Louis catheter was in the duodenum in 13 (14%) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The design modifications to the Gray-St. Louis catheter improved the likelihood of the retention loop residing in the duodenum, while continuing to allow the fenestrated portion of the catheter to reside in the jejunum.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".