MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506112565 · doi:10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.07.019

Adult colo-colonic intussusception caused by congenital bands

2016· article· en· W2506112565 on OpenAlexaff
Yifan Wang, Stephen Gowing, Goffredo Arena

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgery Case Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntussusception (medical disorder)MalignancyAbdominal painBowel obstructionSurgeryRadiologyAnastomosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Intussusception refers to the telescoping of a segment of bowel into the lumen of an adjacent segment. While pediatric intussusception is common and generally idiopathic, adult intussusception is exceedingly rare and is usually attributable to a pathologic lead point. PRESENTATION OF CASE: 37-year-old man who presented with abdominal pain, and was preoperatively diagnosed with a colo-colonic intussusception. Intraoperatively, the lead point was found to be congenital bands, and there was no evidence of underlying malignancy. He underwent a laparoscopic-assisted extended right hemicolectomy with side-to-side ileo-colic anastomosis. DISCUSSION: Colo-colonic intussusception is a rare cause of intestinal obstruction in adults. Patients generally present with subacute abdominal pain and obstructive symptoms, rendering the clinical diagnosis challenging. Computed tomography has been shown to be the most accurate diagnostic imaging modality. Due to the high incidence of underlying malignancy in adult colo-colonic intussusception, en-bloc resection of the involved bowel segment remains the standard of care. CONCLUSION: Congenital bands can serve as a lead point in colo-colonic intussusception, particularly in younger adults. Prompt surgical intervention remains paramount to limit morbidity.

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 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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Surgery Case ReportsSame topicGastrointestinal disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207