Cross-Sectional Study of Swallowing Phases in Cases of Megaesophagus Caused by Chagas Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: , is an infectious cause of secondary achalasia and megaesophagus. Moreover, the oral and pharyngeal phases of swallowing may also be affected, which may contribute to dysphagia and increase the possibility of airway aspiration during and/or after swallowing. This cross-sectional study evaluated, with videofluoroscopy, the oral, pharyngeal, and esophageal phases of swallowing in patients with megaesophagus caused by Chagas disease. The hypothesis is that there is impairment of the pharyngeal phase of swallowing that may increase the risk of airway aspiration. METHODS: A total of 29 patients, aged 48 - 73 years (mean: 63.8 ± 5.1 years), with dysphagia, radiological changes in the esophagus, and positive serologic test for Chagas disease, participated in the study. They were submitted to the videofluoroscopic evaluation of oral, pharyngeal, and esophageal phases, swallowing twice 10 mL of liquid and 10 mL of thickened barium boluses. RESULTS: The most frequent findings were: oral residues and ineffective ejection in the oral phase; residues in vallecula, pharynx, and pyriform sinuses in the pharyngeal phase; abnormal esophageal motility, longer clearance, and longer transit in the esophageal phase. Laryngeal penetration was seen in 28% of the patients. Patients with increased esophageal diameter had more pharyngeal residues than patients without increased esophageal diameter. None of the patients had airway aspiration. CONCLUSION: Megaesophagus caused by Chagas disease may affect all phases of swallowing, with an increase in oral and pharyngeal residues which suggest the impairment of oral and pharyngeal efficiency. None of the patients had airway aspiration.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".