MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2933311895 · doi:10.14740/gr1127

Temporary Gastric Stimulation in Patients With Gastroparesis Symptoms: Low-Resolution Mapping Multiple Versus Single Mucosal Lead Electrograms

2019· article· en· W2933311895 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohsen Hasanin, Om Amin, Hamza Hassan, Archana Kedar, Michael Griswold, Thomas L. Abell

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Louisville
KeywordsGastroparesisMedicineVomitingLead (geology)StimulationInternal medicineGastroenterologyInterstitial cell of CajalRefractory (planetary science)NauseaStomachAnesthesiaGastric emptyingSmooth muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cajal cells have a fundamental role in generating slow waves that regulate gastric motility. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for symptomatic treatment of drug refractory gastroparesis. We hypothesized that using two leads will vary from a single lead by providing greater insight of gastric electrical wave propagation, through differences in measured frequency, amplitude, and frequency over amplitude ratio. We also hypothesized that a significant reduction in symptomatic vomiting score is highly predictive in a single lead temporary gastric electrical stimulation. METHODS: A total of 111 patients with drug-refractory gastroparesis were enrolled. Forty-two patients had single lead, while 69 patients had two leads. All recordings measured mean frequency and amplitude in each lead. Patients documented symptoms using standardized symptom scores at baseline and day 5 post-procedure. RESULTS: Single lead patients with initial low mucosal frequency showed an increase from 3.10 to 4.93 (P = 0.0155), while the high frequency group decreased from 5.89 to 5.12 (P = 0.135). Vomiting score decreased significantly among both groups with GES (P = 0.0001). For two leads, the mucosal frequency decreased at the proximal electrode (P = 0.402), and increased at the distal electrode (P = 0.514), neither statistically significant (P = 0.143). Mucosal electrogram amplitude values changed for both proximal, mean decrease of 0.34 mV (P = 0.241), and distal, mean increase of 0.05 mV (P = 0.65) with a mean difference 0.34 mV (P = 0.238). However, mucosal electrogram frequency and amplitudes on day 5 were highly dependent on the baseline values (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the use of single point electrodes, the use of two low-resolution electrodes allows recording gastric electrical wave propagation with greater detail. Low resolution recording appears to be superior to single point recordings, while awaiting practical high-resolution recordings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207