Evaluation of Open Surgical and Endovascular Treatment Options for Visceral Artery Erosions after Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To report and compare the results of endovascular and open surgical treatment for erosion bleeding of visceral arteries following pancreatitis and pancreatic surgery. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 65 consecutive patients (46 males, mean age 63 ± 14 years) presenting with visceral artery erosions between January 2011 and December 2020. Endpoints were technical success, freedom from reintervention, stent-graft-related complications, and 30-day and one-year mortality. Results: The causes of erosion bleeding included complications of surgical treatment for the pancreas and upper gastrointestinal tract (75%), pancreatitis (19%), and spontaneous bleeding (6%). Pancreatectomy was performed in 34 (52%) patients, representing 2% of all pancreatectomy procedures (n = 1645) performed in our hospital during the study period. A total of 37 (57%) patients underwent endovascular treatment (EVT), and 28 (43%) patients had open surgery (OS) as a primary treatment. Eight of 37 (22%) patients in the EVT group underwent stent-graft treatment of the eroded vessels and 28 (78%) coil embolization. Six (9%) patients underwent reintervention with no significant differences between EVT and OS groups (11% vs. 7%, p = 0.692). Postoperative morbidity and complications in 52% of all patients were higher in the OS group than in the EVT group (41% vs. 68%, p = 0.029). The in-hospital 30-days mortality rate for all patients was 25%, and it was higher in the OS group than in the EVT group (14% vs. 39%, p = 0.017). Conclusions: An endovascular-first strategy for treating visceral arteries erosions may be preferred to reduce the complications associated with open surgery if patients are hemodynamically stable and have no anastomotic insufficiency. Endovascular treatment may be associated with better in-hospital survival when compared to primary open surgery. Further studies are required to identify the optimal approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".