Caustic Oesophageal Stricture Treated By Instrumental Dilatation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oesophageal stricture is one of the most important and redoubtable complications following caustic ingestions in children. Instrumental dilatation is usually considered the first line of treatment. Aims and Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of caustic stenosis treatment when using Lerut dilatators. Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive retrospective study from May 2014 to April 2020. All children under 15 years hospitalised in our department for caustic oesophageal stricture and had a gastrostomy and oesophageal dilatation with insertion of an endless wire were included. Results: A total of 83 patients were included. The sex ratio was 2.2. The mean age was 4 years. The mean time from caustic ingestion to presentation was 90 days. Oesophageal stricture was mostly caused by caustic soda (n = 41) and potash (n = 15). We performed in total 469 dilatations and had only three oesophageal perforations. After a mean follow-up of 17 months, we had 60.2% good results (n = 50) and 7.2% (n = 6) failures. The mortality rate was 13.2% (n = 11). Conclusion: The results of the dilations by Lerut dilatators give encouraging results in our department. It is easy to perform and its complications remain rare. Mortality could be reduced by adequate nutritional support.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".