Thoracoabdominal Aortic Replacement Together with Curative Oncological Surgery in Retroperitoneal and Spinal Tumours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malignancies with an extended encasement or infiltration of the aorta were previously considered inoperable. This series demonstrates replacement and subsequent resection of the thoracoabdominal aorta and its large branches as an adjunct to curative radical retroperitoneal and spinal tumor resection. Five consecutive patients were enrolled between 2016 and 2020, suffering from cancer of unknown primary, pleomorphic carcinoma, chordoma, rhabdoid sarcoma, and endometrial cancer metastasis. Wide surgical resection was the only curative option for these patients. For vascular replacement, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was used as a partial left-heart bypass. The early technical success rate was 100% for vascular procedures and all patients underwent complete radical tumour resection with negative margins. All patients required surgical revision (liquor leak, n = 2; hematoma, n = 3; bypass revision, n = 1; bleeding, n = 1; biliary leak, n = 1). During follow-up (average 47 months, range 22–70) primary patency rates of aortic reconstructions and arterial bypasses were 100%; no patient suffered from recurrent malignant disease. Thoracoabdominal aortic replacement with rerouting of visceral and renal vessels is feasible in oncologic patients. In highly selected young patients, major vascular surgery can push the limits of oncologic surgery further, allowing a curative approach even in extensive retroperitoneal and spinal malignancies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".