An unusual complication of pyloric ring obstruction caused by flange of lumen apposing metal stent in endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is an alternative treatment option for patients with acute cholecystitis, especially for those who are unsuitable for cholecystectomy. Recently used luminal apposing metal stents (LAMS) in EUS-GBD has several advantages over standard metal stents. However, there is no current guideline on where to locate the LAMS when transgastric approach is required. This study reports a case of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) by placing LAMS too close to the pyloric ring. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 79-year-old female patient was referred to our department for evaluation of a large hepatic mass on abdominal ultrasound. Abdominal pain on right upper quadrant and spiking fever up to 38 °C appeared after liver biopsy. Abdominal ultrasound showed thickened GB wall and positive sonographic Murphy sign. DIAGNOSES: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with multiple lung and intrahepatic metastasis, acute cholecystitis, and pyloric ring obstruction caused by flange of LAMS in EUS-GBD. INTERVENTIONS: EUS-GBD via transgastric approach was performed with LAMS. After complete deployment of stent, esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed complete GOO by flange of LAMS. A gastroduodenal metal stent was inserted to relieve the GOO. OUTCOMES: The patient recovered well. She did not complain about obstruction induced symptom such as vomiting or abdominal fullness after gastroduodenal stent insertion. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of EUS-GBD induced GOO. If physicians use LAMS as a transgastric approach in EUS-GBD, the puncture site should be carefully selected considering the size of the flange.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".