MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281922299 · doi:10.14740/jmc3899

Cachexia and Invisible Stomach on Endoscopy: An Endoscopist’s Enigma and a Surgeon’s Axiom

2022· article· en· W4281922299 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kanthi Rekha Badipatla, Suresh Kumar Nayudu, Michelle Frances Dominguez, Jeremey Wong, Kevin Louie, Ali Chaudhri, Robert Karpinos, Karev Dmitry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVomitingEsophagogastroduodenoscopyStomachInflammatory fibroid polypEndoscopyPylorusIntussusception (medical disorder)SurgeryEtiologyRadiologyGeneral surgeryGastroenterologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gastroduodenal intussusception (GDI) is a very rare clinical entity in adults. GDI can present acutely or chronically in adults with varying spectrum of symptoms and signs. GDI can present acutely with abdominal pain, vomiting and palpable mass. In rare instances it can lead to anemia and cachexia. Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen can demonstrate GDI in majority of cases. However, endoscopy findings could lead to identifying etiological factor and tissue diagnosis. In majority of the cases endoscopy may show mucosal or submucosal lesion leading to GDI. We bring forward a case of GDI wherein patient presented with cachexia, intermittent vomiting along with anemia. Further workup including imaging has resulted in the rare diagnosis of GDI. Interestingly we encountered a rare of its kind, endoscopic presentation where there was total absence of stomach due to its complete invagination through the pylorus into the duodenum arising from a giant gastric hyperplastic polyp. We have successfully managed this patient with surgical intervention leading to positive clinical outcomes. On review of literature, we found that it is extremely rare to have a completely absent stomach on endoscopy in a patient with no previous surgical intervention. We would like to share our experience so that endoscopists are aware of such uncommon and interesting presentations. To the best of our knowledge, such a case has not been reported so far in literature.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicGastrointestinal disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207