MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727577608 · doi:10.14740/gr834w

Two Cases of Pneumatosis Cystoides Intestinalis With Intraperitoneal Free Air

2017· article· en· W2727577608 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
K. Wada, Nobuhiro Takeuchi, Masakazu Emori, Masanori Takada, Yusuke Nomura, Akihito Otsuka

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal vascular conditions and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePneumatosis Cystoides IntestinalisExploratory laparotomyConventional PCIPerforationPneumoperitoneumAscitesLaparotomySurgeryVomitingGastroenterologyRadiologyInternal medicineLaparoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intraperitoneal free air (IFA) is sometimes accompanied by pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis (PCI); therefore, proper diagnosis is essential for PCI management. We report two cases of PCI with IFA. A 70-year-old female taking anti-psychotic medication for schizophrenia presented with repeated vomiting and high-grade fever. Computed tomography revealed small, linear gaseous cysts in the intestinal wall along with IFA. Although there was no sign of peritoneal irritation, intestinal perforation was not excluded. Thus, exploratory laparotomy was performed; it revealed no ascites or perforated sites in the intestine, and revealed numerous small air bubbles in the intestinal wall and mesentery. Thus, a diagnosis of PCI was made, and ileostomy was performed to relieve intestinal pressure. The postoperative course was uneventful. A 79-year-old male with pulmonary emphysema presented with dyspnea due to abdominal distention. Cyanosis was evident, and arterial blood gas analysis revealed metabolic acidosis. CT revealed massive IFA along with multiple, small bubbly cysts under the intestinal serosa. He was intubated because of worsening respiratory conditions, and a 12-French drain was inserted to relieve the intraperitoneal pressure. There was no evidence of peritonitis, and IFA was conservatively observed.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicAbdominal vascular conditions and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207