MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024053206 · doi:10.31487/j.jso.2020.03.02

Surgical Planning of Hepatic Metastasectomy Using Radiologist-Performed Intraoperative Ultrasound

2020· article· en· W3024053206 on OpenAlexaff
Sulaiman Nanji, A. Ménard, Diederick Jalink, Lauren O’Malley, Shannon Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetastasectomySurgical planningRadiologyPreoperative careUltrasoundRetrospective cohort studyMagnetic resonance imagingSurgeryMetastasisCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) of the liver is a useful adjunct for surgical planning during hepatic metastasectomy. This study aims to (1) report the frequency of change in operative plan as a result of IOUS findings and (2) determine whether IOUS is still beneficial after implementing a standardized, comprehensive process of preoperative hepatic imaging. Methods: First, a retrospective review of all patients undergoing hepatic metastasectomy at a single institution was conducted to identify how frequently IOUS findings altered the surgical plan. Second, a prospective study was conducted where patients underwent both preoperative CT and MRI within 30 days before surgery to determine if IOUS may still have benefit despite the implementation of a standardized preoperative imaging protocol. Results: In the retrospective review, 39 liver resections were completed; 100% and 36% of patients underwent preoperative CT and MRI, respectively. The mean time between preoperative imaging and surgery was 46 days (7-126). Operative plans were changed in 10/39 (26%) cases based on IOUS. After the standardization of preoperative imaging, 27 liver resections were performed. All patients underwent preoperative CT and MRI; the mean time between preoperative imaging and surgery was 20 days (1-98) (p=0.001). The operative plan was amended in 5/27 (19%) cases based on IOUS (χ 2=1.405, p=0.24). Conclusion: Even after standardizing the quality and timing of preoperative imaging, the operative plan was changed in nearly 1/5 patients due to IOUS. These findings demonstrate the utility of IOUS in surgical planning for hepatic metastasectomy and provide the basis for a quality improvement strategy regarding standardized preoperative imaging.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207