MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116462315 · doi:10.1093/jscr/rjaa512

Chylous ascites following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

2020· article· en· W3116462315 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvie Bowden, Mohammed Firdouse, Graham Roche‐Nagle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Case Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChylous ascitesChyleAscitesSurgeryParacentesisAbdominal aortic aneurysmComplicationAbdominal surgeryRadiologyAneurysm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postoperative chylous ascites is a rare complication of abdominal surgery. Chyle depletion results in nutritional, immunologic and metabolic deficiencies, making it a serious and potentially life-threatening condition for which prompt diagnosis and management is imperative. A 72-year-old male was referred for open repair of a 62 cm juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Following resumption of diet, he developed abdominal distention. Therapeutic paracenteses confirmed chylous ascites. Failed conservative management and lymphatic embolization lead to surgical sealance of lymphatic leak using glue. Postoperatively, a full diet was tolerated with no further ascites. Paracentesis is the diagnostic modality of choice in evaluating patients with ascites. Management is challenging and should be multifaceted and tailored to individual patient needs. Cornerstones of therapy include correction of the underlying etiology and conservative measures. When conservative measures fail, other interventions can be considered, such as somatostatin analogs, surgical ligation or glue embolization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical Case ReportsSame topicLymphatic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207