Double Pylorus: Report of a Case With Endoscopic Follow-Up and Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Double pylorus is a rare endoscopic finding that has been reported in 0.001% to 0.4% of upper gastrointestinal endoscopies and can be either congenital or acquired. Acquired double pylorus is usually an uncommon complication of peptic ulcer that erodes and creates a fistula between the duodenal bulb and the prepyloric antrum. We describe a case of a 67-year-old man who experienced mild epigastric pain and dyspepsia over the last 6 months. The patient periodically took nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) due to joint pain. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed gastritis and a double pylorus. An accessory channel connected the lesser curvature of the prepyloric antrum to the duodenal bulb and the endoscope was able to be passed through both of the ducts. The Helicobacter pylori quick test proved positive. Two years later, a follow-up endoscopy showed that fistula fused with normal pylorus and there was a single large opening.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".