MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2790734701 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.038

A38 INCIDENCE OF APPENDICULAR TUMORS TREATED WITH PRIMARY OR DELAYED APPENDECTOMY, COLECTOMY, OR RIGHT HEMICOLECTOMY IN THE ADULT POPULATION IN A REGIONAL ONTARIO HOSPITAL.

2018· article· en· W2790734701 on OpenAlexaffabout
J STRUYK, A DELIALLISI, I Pacheco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAppendixIncidence (geometry)PopulationColectomyGeneral surgeryRight hemicolectomyColorectal cancerCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Appendicular neoplasms are uncommon to rare tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Malignant tumor of the appendix account for ~0.5% of all tumors arising from the gastrointestinal tract. Due to their low frequency their true etiopathogenesis and biologic behavior remain poorly understood. This lack of knowledge has created controversy around the classification of primary epithelial tumors, especially when there is peritoneal spread. Given these discrepancies, we sought to investigate their incidence in the adult population captured by Grey Bruce Health Sciences in order to raise awareness that tumors of the appendix may occur in the setting of acute abdominal pain and as an incidental finding. The surgical pathology data base (Copath) at GBHS collected over the past 10 years was reviewed to determine the incidence of primary appendicular neoplasms, benign or malignant, in the setting of primary and delayed appendectomy, colectomies, and right hemicolectomy. Appendix removal was the only inclusion criterion. Additional data was collected for cases diagnosed with appendiceal tumors by reviewing Power Chart.Statistical analysis for significant differences will be performed according to the two-tailed Student’s t-test for unpaired data and analysis of variance when appropriate. For all determinations, results will be expressed as the mean ± SEM; N will indicate the number of patients. P <0.05 will be considered to be statistically significant. Of the 2301 primary and delayed appendectomies, colectomies, and right hemicolectomies performed in the last 10 years, 68 cases (~2.95%) were diagnosed with an appendicular neoplasm. Aside from common appendiceal tumors, we found two very rare cases of a primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor and a possible primary small cell carinoma. There was a slight predominance toward females (57%) and 70% of cases occurred after the age of 60. The most common complaint being RLQ pain (59%). Of the 68 total neoplasms, 14 were removed as delayed appendectomies with none being initially suspected of neoplasm. Of all delayed appendectomies performed in the last 5 years, 16% were diagnosed with an appendiceal tumor, as opposed to only 2% of primary appendectomies. We concluded that given the uncommon nature of appendicitis at ages greater than 60 years, these patients, particularly females, who present with RLQ pain should be suspected of a possible appendiceal tumor. None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicTesticular diseases and treatments→French-language works237,207→