A case of renal cell carcinoma in a patient with situs inversus: Operative considerations and a review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Situs inversus, an uncommon mirror-image reversal of the major visceral and thoracic organs, is seldom of medical significance. However, the recognition of their unique anatomy is extremely important for those requiring surgical intervention. There are very few reported cases of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) developing in people with situs inversus. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case in Canada. A review of the literature only identified nine published cases worldwide. Here, we review and summarize pertinent information, including patient age and sex, size and location of tumour, method of surgery, and pathology. Our case, a 65-year-old male, presented with left flank pain and gross hematuria. He was diagnosed with left renal cancer as well as tumour thrombus extending into the left renal veins and inferior vena cava (IVC), clinical T3aN0M0. An abdomen and pelvis computed tomography (CT) scan showed a left-to-right reversal of his organs, a mirror-image, and situs inversus was diagnosed. A left radical nephrectomy with left renal vein and IVC tumour thrombectomy through a left open midline incision was performed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".