Is VATS Bullectomy and Pleurectomy an Effective Method for the Management of Spontaneous Pneumothorax?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spontaneous pneumothorax, primary or secondary, is a common medical emergency for which specific indications for surgical intervention are well defined in selected patients. The traditional surgical approach has been by limited thoracotomy using axillary or posterolateral incision. With the advent of video-assisted minimally invasive technique in the last 20 years the traditional approach is infrequently used. The definitive operation to prevent recurrent pneumothorax by surgical approach requires bullectomy and parietal pleurectomy. The recurrence rate after the traditional open surgical approach has been low at <2%. On the other hand, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, although better tolerated has a higher recurrence rate at 5% [1]. Information on post-operative morbidity and mortality are lacking. For this reason, we have reviewed our experience at one institution on the outcome of the VATS approach. We found that prolonged post- operative air leak is the most common complication and cigarette smoking remains an important associated factor.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".