Coloseminal vesicle fistula after low anterior resection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A rectoseminal vesicle fistula after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer is a rare complication despite their anatomic proximity. From a Medline search from 1966 to date, a total of twenty-one previous cases of coloseminal vesicle fistula have been reported. From these cases, eleven were a complication of laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE: This report presents the case of a 63-year-old patient who was readmitted to the hospital on the fifteenth postoperative day after his surgical intervention for fever, abdominal pain, dysuria and pneumaturia. A sinography with water-soluble contrast revealed a tract between the rectum and the seminal vesicle. The condition was treated conservatively with antibiotics, urinary catheter and a transanastomotic Malecot probe for abscess drainage. The fistula had completely recovered on postoperative day 71 and the patient is still symptoms free, six months after the complication developed. DISCUSSION: This case reinforces the presumed link between anastomotic leakage and rectoseminal vesicle fistula in cases of low anterior resection while reviewing and summarizing similar previously reported cases on the course of the disease, diagnostic procedures and treatment options. CONCLUSION: Seminal vesicle are susceptible to fistula in oncological resection of rectum. Both CT scan with water-soluble contrast or sinography are effective diagnostic examinations. Depending on the characteristics of the fistula, conservative approach may be adequate and benefits much less morbidities than the surgical options.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".