Biliary strictures after cholecystectomy: long term results of a novative endoscopic treatment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In the early 1990's, we devised a novative protocol for the endoscopic treatment of post-cholecystectomy bile duct strictures: the purpose of this article is to assess the long-term outcomes of this approach. METHODOLOGY: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients who underwent endoscopic stenting. Multiple stents were positioned it iterative duodenoscopies until a maximal diameter was reached. The stents were left in situ for 2 years, even if occluded. A long-term quality of life assessment using the SF-36 health status questionnaire was also performed. RESULTS: Eleven patients underwent a mean of 6 ERCP each; a mean number of 6.5 stents were inserted for a mean total French size of 62.8 F. After a mean following of 12.3 ± 2.7 years, restenosis occurred in 1 patient. The results of the long-term quality of life assessment were similar to those of the Canadian general population. CONCLUSION: The little invasive nature and the excellent long-term results of our endoscopic protocol make it an acceptable alternative to surgery for patients who accept multiple duodenoscopies. The progressive dilatation of a stenosis by the sequential insertion of a continuously increasing number of stents without prophylactic stents changes appears as the key to success.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".