MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754124250 · doi:10.1111/vsu.12693

Minimally invasive small intestinal exploration and targeted abdominal organ biopsy with a wound retraction device in 42 cats (2005‐2015)

2017· article· en· W2754124250 on OpenAlex
Jessica Baron, Michelle A. Giuffrida, Philipp D. Mayhew, Ameet Singh, J. Brad Case, William T. N. Culp, David E. Holt, Kelli N. Mayhew, Jeffrey J. Runge

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMinimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbdomenLaparotomySurgeryBiopsyCATSLaparoscopyRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique and evaluate short-term outcome after minimally invasive small intestinal exploration and targeted organ biopsy with a wound retractor device (WRD) in cats. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective study. ANIMALS: Forty-two cats. METHODS: A wound retractor was inserted into the abdomen on the ventral midline through a 2-4 cm incision at the level of the umbilicus. Short segments (6-10 cm long) of intestinal tract were sequentially exteriorized and explored through the WRD. Full thickness, small intestinal biopsies were obtained extracorporeally via the WRD. A commercially available single-port device was inserted through the WRD for laparoscopic exploration of the abdomen. RESULTS: The majority of the small intestine could be exteriorized and explored through the WRD. In all cases, full thickness biopsies of the small intestine of diagnostic quality were obtained. The most common histological findings were inflammatory bowel disease (n = 16), intestinal lymphoma (n = 14), and eosinophilic enteritis (n = 7). Two cases required conversion to a traditional open laparotomy due to abdominal pathology diagnosed after placement of the WRD (abdominal adhesions and need for a splenectomy). Postoperative complications occurred in 4 of 39 cats (10.3%), leading to 2 deaths after discharge from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MISIETB with a WRD alone or combined with laparoscopy is a safe technique for small intestinal exploration and targeted abdominal organ biopsy in cats. Single-port laparoscopy can effectively be performed through the WRD for complete abdominal exploration and biopsy of abdominal organs.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.222 · 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