KARACİĞER KİST HİDATİĞİNDE PERİKİSTEKTOMİ: TEK MERKEZ DENEYİMİMİZ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the results of total pericystectomy in hepatic hydatid disease. Material and Method: The data of patients who underwent total pericystectomy between 1999-2019 was evaluated. Results: Of 308 patients treated as in-patients, 32 (17 females-15 males) were found to have had total pericystectomy. Median age was 44 (range:17-73) years. Indications were: easily accessible anatomic location (20), albendazole toxicity (4), unresponsiveness to albendazol treatment (4), tumor suspicion (2), pregnancy (1) and nonadherence to albendazole use (1). Median cyst diameter was 75 mm (42-100), median cyst number was 1 (1-8). Fourteen patients had more than one cyst. Total pericystectomy alone was performed in 23 patients, while additional cysts were treated in a further 9. Of the 23 pericystectomy only patients, 18 received closed and 5 open pericystectomy. Median 36 minutes (12-78) Pringle clamping was performed in 10 patients. Median hospital stay was 6 days (1-60). Low output (<150 cc/day) bile fistula was seen in 3 patients, intraabdominal infection in 2 patients and superficial infection in 2 patients. No recurrence was observed during a median follow-up of 62 months (14-236) in 20 pericystectomy only patients. Conclusion: Pericystectomy can be performed with low morbidity and mortality in an experienced center. Recurrence risk is reduced in comparison with conservative surgery.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".