Open lung biopsy performed in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a safe procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is an interstitial lung disease with a fatal prognosis.The diagnosis is made on the basis of high-resolution computed tomography and histological examination in selected cases.Aim: To determine the risk of complications of open lung biopsy performed in patients with IPF.Material and methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 51 patients who underwent diagnostic excision of pulmonary parenchyma due to IPF in the period 1995-2014.We assessed the complication rate, length of drainage, postoperative period and 30-day mortality.We compared the results of treatment in the groups of patients operated on with thoracotomy and videothoracoscopy.Results: The mean age of patients was 58 (47% female, 53% male) forced vital capacity (FVC) was 81%, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) was 80% and body mass index (BMI) was 27 kg/m 2 .Thoracotomies (lateral, muscle sparing or anterior) were performed in 20 patients between 1995 and 2012 and videothoracoscopy in 31 patients operated on in the years 2009-2014.Patients in study groups did not differ considering age (p = 0.40), gender (p = 0.81), FVC (p = 0.08), FEV 1 (p = 0.13) or BMI (p = 0.75).Postoperative complications occurred in 3.9% of patients (atrial arrhythmia 1.9% and recurrent pneumothorax 1.9%) with equal incidence in both study groups (p = 0.75).Median stay after thoracotomy was 4 days while after videothoracoscopy it was 3 days (p = 0.04).Conclusions: Open lung biopsy performed on patients with IPF is a safe procedure.Open lung biopsy performed through thoracotomy could be as safe as through VATS, however is characterized by longer postoperative stay.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".