Duodenoduodenostomy for obstruction of the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum in cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical findings, surgical treatment, and outcome associated with duodenoduodenostomy for treatment of duodenal obstruction secondary to adhesions associated with the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study (1996-2016). ANIMALS: Fourteen Holstein cattle. METHODS: Medical records of cows treated at 3 academic surgical referral centers with duodenoduodenostomy for duodenal obstruction secondary to adhesions associated with the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum were reviewed. Data that were collected included signalment, physical examination results, laboratory results, diagnostic findings, treatments, and survival to discharge. Owners were contacted for follow-up information. RESULTS: Affected cattle ranged in age from 4 months to 5 years. Electrolyte abnormalities, including severe hypochloremia, were present in all cases. Abnormalities included cranial duodenal distension without concurrent distension of the descending duodenum and palpable focal adhesions in the region of the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum. Duodenoduodenostomy involved a stapled (n = 11) or sutured (n = 3) side-to-side anastomosis between the cranial duodenum and descending duodenum. Thirteen of 14 cattle that were treated with duodenoduodenostomy survived to hospital discharge. Long-term follow-up was available in 8 cows, and 7 of those 8 survived for at least 1 year. CONCLUSION: Short- and long-term survival were favorable after duodenoduodenostomy in cattle with adhesions associated with the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Duodenoduodenostomy results in acceptable survival and future productivity in cows with obstruction at the sigmoid flexure of the duodenum.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".