Diverticulitis of the appendix—case report and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Appendiceal diverticulitis is a rare diagnostic most often mistaken for an acute appendicitis. A 72-year-old man presented with a transfixing abdominal pain for 48 hours. Appendicitis was diagnosed on computed tomography scan, but a neoplasm could not be excluded. A laparoscopic hemicolectomy was performed after a surgical consensus considering the neoplastic appearance of the lesion and anatomical feature. Histopathology finally revealed an appendiceal diverticulitis. Appendiceal diverticulum is a rare condition. Most will lead to an appendiceal diverticulitis, which present similarly to an appendicitis. Perforation rate and mortality rate are much higher in appendiceal diverticulitis than in appendicitis. Furthermore, appendiceal diverticular disease is strongly associated with neoplasms, especially mucinous neoplasms and thus pseudomyxoma peritonei. Considering the high complication rate and malignant association, an appendicectomy in case of an appendiceal diverticulitis or of an incidental finding of appendiceal diverticulosis should be recommended to the patient.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".