MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3143039570 · doi:10.21037/dmr-20-154

Endoscopic recanalization using rendez-vous technique for complete upper esophageal obstruction: a case report

2021· article· en· W3143039570 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Amine Alaoui, Anne-Sophie Studer, Georges Rakovich, Nader Kaouam, Tareck Ayad, Henri Atlas, Pierre Y. Garneau, Ronald Denis, Radu Pescarus

Bibliographic record

VenueDigestive Medicine Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysphagiaSurgeryStenosisRadiologyGastrostomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Esophageal obstruction is a rare late adverse effect after head and neck cancer radiotherapy and chemotherapy treatment. The approach to complete esophageal obstruction is not well established in cases where malignant recurrence has been ruled out. We hereby present the case of a patient that presented with total dysphagia and multiple aspiration episodes. A minimally invasive endoscopic management was proposed for this complete esophageal obstruction. The endoscopic rendez-vous technique for esophageal recanalization requires an antegrade access through the mouth and a retrograde access through a feeding gastrostomy. Two interventional endoscopists locate and measure the length of the stenosis under fluoroscopic control. Once the axis of the two endoscopes is aligned, recanalization is achieved using a needle knife incision followed by balloon dilatation over a guide wire. Nasogastric (NG) tube insertion is performed at the end of the procedure to prevent premature recurrence of the stenosis. Subsequent dilatations were necessary after this procedure to obtain a satisfactory functional result. Post-operative speech therapy follow-up was also required. The endoscopic rendez-vous technique is hence a reliable and safe therapeutic option for short stenosis with transillumination. A multidisciplinary approach and long-term follow-up are mandatory in order to maximize the functional benefit for these complex patients.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.180
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigestive Medicine ResearchSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207