MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582643605 · doi:10.21037/jtd.2017.01.11

Colobronchial fistula: the pathogenesis, clinical presentations, diagnosis and treatment

2017· article· en· W2582643605 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jinbo Zhao, Nan Ma, Zhengwei Zhao, Jie Lei, Qiang Lu, Feng Tian, Yongan Zhou, Yong Han, Xiaofei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic Disease · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Basic Research Program of Shaanxi ProvinceUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicinePyonephrosisEtiologyFistulaDiaphragmatic breathingAbscessBarium enemaSurgeryMalignancyRadiologyInternal medicineColonoscopyPathologyColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Colobronchial fistula (CBF) is rare and easy to be delayed in clinic. There is no systemic study about this disease. The pathogenesis, clinical presentations, diagnosis and treatment of CBF were analyzed in this study. METHODS: The clinical data from 37 cases of CBF, which included one case in our institute and the other 36 cases in literature from January 1960 to August 2016, were reviewed and analyzed. The etiology, clinical presentations, diagnostic and therapeutic methods, and outcomes were summarized. RESULTS: The causes of CBF included Crohn's disease, postoperative intraperitoneal adhesion, diaphragmatic hernia, pulmonary infection or abscess, colonic malignancy, colonic interposition, radiation, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), diaphragmatic mesh repair, pulmonary tuberculosis and pyonephrosis. Based on the anatomical location and the causes of fistula, CBF were divided into four types: type I, CBF secondary to the adhesion among colon, diaphragm and lung; type II, CBF secondary to diaphragmatic hernia; type III, CBF secondary to sub diaphragmatic abscess or emphysema; type VI, CBF secondary to colon interposition. The characteristic clinical presentations of CBF was productive cough with foul smelling sputum (78.38%), most of the patients were finally confirmed the diagnosis by barium enema or water-soluble contrast enema study (67.57%) and computer tomography (CT) scan/with multiplanar reconstruction (16.22%); 35 cases (94.59%) accepted the surgical treatment. Among 31 patients with recorded follow-up data, 26 patients recovered unevenly, but 5 patients died in 1 month after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: CBF is a rare but can not be ignored disease. Anything which may induce the direct or indirect connection between colon and lung tissue may result in CBF. Productive cough with foul smelling sputum is the characteristic symptom. Radiological investigations such as barium enema and/or CT scan with multiplanar reconstruction are valuable for the confirmation of CBF. Surgery based on the etiology is the foundation of treatment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic DiseaseSame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207