MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247158322 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.234

A233 ENDOSCOPIC ASSISTED ENUCLEATION OF SMALL GASTRIC SUBEPITHELIAL TUMORS: AN EARLY SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

2018· article· en· W4247158322 on OpenAlexaffabout
Majid Alsahafi, Francesca R. Donnellan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnucleationSurgeryBiopsyEndoscopic ultrasoundEndoscopyGiSTRadiologyStromal cellInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) are not uncommonly discovered on routine endoscopy. They are often associated with a diagnostic challenge and require follow up to ensure no interval growth suggestive of malignant potential. Endoscopic assisted enucleation is a technique to facilitate a tissue diagnosis and removal. To report an early single center experience with endoscopic assisted enucleation of small gastric SETs. A retrospective case series of prospectively collected data for patients who underwent endoscopic assisted enucleation of small gastric SETs at Vancouver General Hospital. All patient underwent prior endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for lesion characterization. Endoscopic interventions include: suction-ligation-unroofing-biopsy (SLUB) or retraction-ligation-unroofing-biopsy (RLUB). The technical success of the procedures, diagnostic yield and complication were described. A total of 7 patients underwent endoscopic assisted enucleation between October 2015 and October 2016. The mean age was 59 years and 71% were female. Gastric SETs were incidentally discovered on gastroscopy in 5 patients and on CT scan in 1 patient. 1 patient presented with anemia with ulcerated SET. On EUS, the median size was 2 cm (range 1.1 to 3), 3 arise from the fourth layer, 2 from the third and 2 from the second layer. 2 patients underwent EUS guided biopsies and both were non diagnostic. The initial endoscopic procedure was successful in 6 patients but failed in 1 patient. This patient had a 3 cm SET and is awaiting surgery. Biopsies after unroofing provided specific diagnosis in 4 (gastrointestinal stromal tumor, neuroma, lipoma, heterotrophic pancreas) and non-specific diagnosis in 2. There were no complications. Follow up endoscopy data was available in 4 patients: 3 had no visible lesion, 1 had the endoloop remains in place. Endoscopic assisted enucleation of gastric subepithelial tumors is technically feasible and safe. It facilitates diagnosis and potential cure limiting the need for surveillance. None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207