MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887426913 · doi:10.1186/s13017-018-0192-3

2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

2018· review· en· W2887426913 on OpenAlexaff
Michele Pisano, Luigi Zorcolo, Cecilia Merli, Stefania Cimbanassi, Elia Poiasina, Marco Ceresoli, Ferdinando Agresta, Niccolò Allievi, Giovanni Bellanova, Federico Coccolini, Cláudio Saddy Rodrigues Coy, Paola Fugazzola, Carlos Augusto Real Martinez, Giulia Montori, Ciro Paolillo, Thiago José Penachim, Bruno M. Pereira, Tarcisio Reis, Angelo Restivo, João Rezende-Neto, Massimo Sartelli, Massimo Valentino, Fikri M. Abu‐Zidan, Itamar Ashkenazi, Miklosh Bala, Osvaldo Chiara, Nicola De Angelis, Simona Deidda, Belinda De Simone, Salomone Di Saverio, Elena Finotti, Kenji Inaba, Ernest E. Moore, Steven D. Wexner, Walter Biffl, Raúl Coimbra, Angelo Guttadauro, Ari Leppäniemi, Ron Maier, Stefano Magnone, Alain Chicom Mefire, Andrew Peitzmann, Boris Sakakushev, Michael Sugrue, Pierluigi Viale, Dieter Weber, Jeffry L. Kashuk, Gustavo Pereira Fraga, Ioran Kluger, Fausto Catena, Luca Ansaloni

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Emergency Surgery · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerforationColostomyColorectal cancerGeneral surgerySurgeryBowel obstructionContext (archaeology)CancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ᅟ: Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC). Methods: The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017. Results: CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann's procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted.With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value.Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required.Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation. Conclusions: The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations388
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Emergency SurgerySame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207