Hot avulsion may be effective as salvage treatment for focal Barrett’s esophagus remaining after endoscopic therapy for dysplasia or early cancer: a preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Both endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are used to treat Barrett's esophagus (BE) complicated by dysplasia and intramucosal cancer. However, focal areas of BE can remain after otherwise successful application of these techniques. We report the results of hot avulsion using a hot biopsy forceps to resect these residual focal areas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study from a prospective database in a tertiary reference center from August 2013 to May 2015. All included patients had undergone hot avulsion for eradication of residual focal areas of BE that were ≤ 1 cm and not suspicious for dysplasia, following at least one previous endoscopic treatment for dysplasia or intramucosal cancer. RESULTS: 35 patients harboring 124 residual areas of 1 - 7 mm were treated with hot avulsion. After a mean follow-up of 17.4 months, all patients achieved complete eradication of residual focal BE. One of the patients required a second hot avulsion treatment. Hot avulsion provided samples in all cases but limited the assessment of dysplasia (cautery artifact) in 20.2 % of them. The only complication was bleeding in two patients, which was easily stopped by soft coagulation. CONCLUSIONS: Hot avulsion appears to be effective and safe in removing focal BE ≤ 1 cm at its greatest length remaining after endoscopic treatment for dysplasia or early cancer. Further studies are required before this technique can be considered the standard of care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".