Paraesophageal hernia repair in elderly patients: outcomes from a 10-year retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has become the preferred management for paraesophageal hernias (PEH); however surgical management versus watchful waiting remains controversial in older patients. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed the outcomes of PEH repair in elderly patients surgically managed at The Ottawa Hospital over a 10-year period. Patients older than 60 years who underwent PEH repair were examined with respect to presentation, technique and associated complications. RESULTS: Despite similar demographics, our study groups showed significantly different characteristics of surgical techniques. Most surgeries were performed laparoscopically; however, patients aged 70 years or older underwent more open and emergency surgeries than the younger group. Despite a 30-day postoperative complication rate of 45 % and 13 % in the older (≥ 70 yr) and younger (60-69 yr) groups, respectively, the rates during elective repair were similar. There were no deaths in the younger group, whereas the 30-day mortality rate was 5 % in patients aged 70 years and older, including a 2-fold increase with emergency repair (4 v. 2 patients). CONCLUSION: Management of PEH in older adults remains controversial in relation to a surgical versus watchful waiting approach. We found that in patients aged 70 years and older who undergo surgical management of PEH experience more open and emergency procedures, which are associated with higher complication rates. However, in the elective setting older patients had increased laparoscopic repairs and comparable complication rates to younger patients. We found the greatest outcomes with early, elective laparoscopic repair, irrespective of age.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".