MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993800084 · doi:10.7759/cureus.6317

Giant Mucocele of the Remnant Esophagus: Case Report of a Rare Complication Following a Bipolar Esophageal Exclusion Procedure

2019· article· en· W2993800084 on OpenAlexaff
Sivanathan Chandramohan, Vaithiswaran Velayoudam, Lakshman Aridhasan Meenakshi, Sakthivel Harikrishnan

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryEsophagusPleural effusionEsophagectomyAbscessThoracotomyPerforationEsophageal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a case of a symptomatic mucocele of the esophagus following surgical isolation of the diseased esophagus, which needed surgical resection. A 33-year-old male presented to us with shock, high-grade fever, and breathlessness five days after the onset of sudden, severe lower chest and upper abdominal pain preceded by an episode of retching and vomiting. He was initially managed elsewhere by right intercostal drainage for right-sided pleural effusion, broad-spectrum parenteral antibiotics, and total parenteral nutrition. CT chest showed a right loculated pleural effusion and distal oesophageal perforation with active contrast leak into the right pleural space. He was subsequently referred to us in view of suspected Boerhaave's syndrome and clinical worsening. In view of hemodynamic instability with uncontrolled sepsis, he was planned for surgery. Intraoperatively, there was a 4 cm long distal oesophageal perforation, 4 cm above the esophagogastric junction on the right, with an unhealthy apex, communicating with a large abscess cavity in the right pleural space with thick purulent contents. End cervical esophagostomy with esophagogastric junction stapling and feeding jejunostomy was performed in addition to transhiatal drainage of the abscess at the lower end of the esophagus and the placement of an additional intercostal drain. The postoperative period was uneventful, and he was discharged. After two months, he was assessed for possible esophagectomy and gastric pullup. Dense adhesions at thoracoscopy precluded any esophageal delineation and dissection. Attempted transhiatal dissection of the esophagus was unsuccessful in view of cicatrization, and it was decided to forego esophagectomy and proceed with bypass alone by a retrosternal gastric pull-up and cervical esophagogastrostomy. He was discharged following an uneventful postoperative period of recovery. Three months later, the patient presented with complaints of pain in the chest for three weeks, associated with hiccups. He was diagnosed to have a mucocele of the remnant esophagus based on a CT scan. The esophageal mucocele was excised by a transthoracic approach and, he was relieved of the pressure symptoms. Following the esophageal exclusion procedure, a mucocele of the remnant esophagus can develop due to the accumulation of secretions leading to subsequent dilatation. Small mucoceles are usually asymptomatic and often go unnoticed. However, in rare cases, it may enlarge to cause compression symptoms such as respiratory distress, chest pain, cough, hiccups, and an inability to swallow. Cross-sectional imaging clinches the diagnosis, and definitive surgery consists of surgical resection by a transthoracic approach.

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)0.000
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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207