An Unusual Case of Intraabdominal Abscess After a Colonoscopy With Polypectomy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of colonoscopies in the screening of colorectal cancers has helped in the early detection and treatment of these cancers. Less than 0.5% of patients develop colonoscopy complications, mostly bleeding, and less frequently, perforations. There have been very few reported cases of micro-perforations following colonoscopies. We present a case of a 66-year-old female smoker who had undergone a screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer with two polyps removed 3 weeks prior, who was brought to the hospital because of altered mental status and hypotension. A computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis with contrast demonstrated intraabdominal abscess which was drained by interventional radiology. A culture of the pus grew Streptococcus constellatus , a pus-forming bacterium. She was treated with ceftriaxone and metronidazole for a total of 6 weeks, and a repeat CT of abdomen and pelvis demonstrated complete resolution. The only contributing factor to the formation of the intraabdominal abscess was a screening colonoscopy with polypectomy, which might have caused micro-perforations in the colon with the seeding of Streptococcus constellatus . The occurrence of intraabdominal abscess following a colonoscopy is very rare, and requires a high index of suspicion in patients who present with sepsis following colonoscopies. J Med Cases. 2021;12(8):301-305 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3730
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it