Massive gallstone in an asymptomatic Indigenous Canadian male
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Gallstones are present in 10-15% of North Americans, but only 20% become symptomatic. This case report describes a patient with a 7.5 cm gallstone detected incidentally while being investigated for cardiac pathology. This is the first report in the English literature of a stone this size that has remained clinically asymptomatic. This work is reported in line with the SCARE criteria. CASE REPORT: The patient was a 71-year-old Indigenous Canadian male, with atrial fibrillation. His cardiologist ordered a CT scan of his chest, which incidentally identified a large gallstone. He was referred to surgery for asymptomatic cholelithiasis. An uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed. Final pathology showed a 7.5 cm gallstone with features of chronic cholecystitis. DISCUSSION: The patient's ethnicity and gallstone size placed him at increased risk for gallbladder cancer, gallstone fistulization and perforation. We reviewed the literature for asymptomatic patients who may benefit from cholecystectomy: transplant recipients and those with hemolytic disorders. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not currently indicated in diabetics and bariatric surgery patients. CONCLUSION: This case report shows that there are asymptomatic patients with massive gallstones. A review of their history, risk factors for malignancy and future gallstone related complications must be carefully weighed and discussed prior to deciding on surgical versus expectant management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".