Association between biliary tree manipulation and outcome in dogs undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder mucocele: A multi‐institutional retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether catheterization of the common bile duct (CBD) is associated with outcome in dogs undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder mucocele and to determine whether this association is modified by the catheterization method. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective cohort study. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 252) that underwent cholecystectomy for gallbladder mucocele. METHODS: Dogs were identified via electronic medical record review at four veterinary teaching hospitals. Baseline dog characteristics, surgical findings, and methods including normograde vs retrograde CBD catheterization, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes and complications were recorded. Variables were compared between dogs with and without catheterization. RESULTS: Catheterized dogs had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (P = .04), higher total bilirubin (P = .01), and were more likely to have dilated CBD at the time of surgery (P < .01). Incidence of major and minor intraoperative complications was similar between the two groups. Surgical time was longer for the catheterized group (P = .01). The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the groups; however, postoperative pancreatitis was associated with performing CBD catheterization (P = .01). This association was retained as an independent association in a multivariable model that addressed baseline group differences (P = .04). Likelihood of developing postoperative pancreatitis was not different between normograde and retrograde catheterization (P = .57). CONCLUSION: Catheterization of the CBD was associated with development of postoperative pancreatitis. This was not influenced by the method of catheterization. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The requirement for catheterization of the CBD during open cholecystectomy in dogs should be carefully considered, particularly in dogs without evidence of biliary obstruction because the procedure may induce postoperative pancreatitis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".