Mesenteric Excision and Exclusion for Ileocolic Crohn’s Disease: Feasibility and Safety of an Innovative, Combined Surgical Approach With Extended Mesenteric Excision and Kono-S Anastomosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease traditionally does not include a high ligation of the ileocolic pedicle, and most commonly is performed with a stapled side-to-side ileocolic anastomosis. The mesentery has recently been implicated in the pathophysiology of Crohn's disease. Two techniques have been developed and are associated with reduced postoperative recurrence: the Kono-S anastomosis that excludes diseased mesentery and extended mesenteric excision that resects diseased mesentery. We aimed to assess the technical feasibility and safety of a novel combination of techniques: mesenteric excision and exclusion. TECHNIQUES: This initial report is a single-center descriptive study of consecutive adults who underwent mesenteric excision and exclusion for primary or recurrent ileocolic Crohn's disease from September 2020 to June 2021. Medication exposure and endoscopic balloon dilation before surgery were recorded. Phenotype was classified using the Montreal Classification. Thirty-day outcomes were reported. A video of the mesenteric excision and exclusion including the Kono-S anastomosis is presented. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with ileocolic Crohn's disease underwent mesenteric excision and exclusion: 100% had strictures, 59% had fistulas, 81% were on biologics, and 27% had previous ileocolic resection(s). Seventy-two percent underwent laparoscopic procedures, a mesenteric defect was closed in 86%, omental flaps were fashioned in 77%, and 3 patients were diverted. Median operative time was 175 minutes. Median postoperative stay was 4 days. At 30 days, there were 2 readmissions for reintervention: 1 seton placement and 1 percutaneous drainage of a sterile collection. There were no cases of intra-abdominal sepsis or anastomotic leak. CONCLUSIONS: Mesenteric excision and exclusion represents an innovative, progressive, and promising approach that appears to be highly feasible and safe. Further study is warranted to determine if mesenteric excision and exclusion is associated with reduced postoperative recurrence of ileocolic Crohn's disease.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".