New method of indocyanine green fluorescence sentinel node mapping for early gastric cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: . METHOD: (NOVADAQ, Canada) was used to illuminate regional lymph nodes from the serosal side. Positive staining was confirmed by at least 3 surgeons and an endoscopist during surgery (Figure 1). Lymph node dissection and gastrectomy were performed according to the criteria of gastric cancer treatment guidelines of JGCA. RESULT: All 6 patients had gastrectomy with laparoscopic approach. ICG positive lymphatic flow and lymph nodes were able to be observed in all the patients. Final pathological diagnosis was all StageI and curative resection. All the patients had ICG positive lymphatic area in left gastric artery (LGA) area. Two patients with tumor located in L area had ICG positive flow to right gastroepipoloic artery (RGEA) area. The mean of ICG positive lymph nodes was 8.6. One patient had a metastatic lymph node in station No.4, which was positive for ICG. CONCLUSION: Our method made identification of ICG positive lymph nodes easy in SN mapping in back-table under room light. Although further accumulation and analysis are necessary, we may be able to apply this method for intraoperative SN mapping of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgey.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".