MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367059532 · doi:10.1055/a-2063-3291

A novel strategy facilitating endoscopic submucosal dissection of proximal colonic lesions: the rubber band and sheath method

2023· article· en· W4367059532 on OpenAlexaff
Hirofumi Abe, Takashi Toyonaga, Douglas Motomura, Ryosuke Ishida, Hiroya Sakaguchi, Tetsuya Yoshizaki, Yuzo Kodama

Bibliographic record

VenueEndoscopy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral and Maxillofacial Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic submucosal dissectionTraction (geology)Dissection (medical)SurgeryNatural rubberEndoscopyAnatomyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 70-year-old woman was referred to our hospital for the treatment of a laterally spreading tumor in the ascending colon ([ Fig. 1 ]). Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was performed using a novel strategy with an orthodontic elastic rubber band (Latex Elastics Light 8 mm; Tomy International, Osaka, Japan) and EndoTrac (EndoTrac T type; Top, Tokyo, Japan) ([ Fig. 2 ], [ Video 1 ]) [ 1 ]. The latter is a traction device composed of a plastic sheath and a line with an adjustable loop at its tip. Fig. 1 White-light view of the laterally spreading tumor in the ascending colon. Fig. 2 The EndoTrac T type (Top, Tokyo, Japan), which is a traction device, is composed of a plastic sheath and a line with an adjustable loop at its tip. Video 1 The rubber band and sheath method for endoscopic submucosal dissection of proximal colonic lesions. Quality: mobile 360 480 720 Download For preparation, the rubber band was tied to the tip of EndoTrac and wrapped around the endoscope hood twice. Both the endoscope and EndoTrac were inserted simultaneously. ESD was started from the partial mucosal incision at the anal side of the lesion, followed by deeper cutting. Then, the EndoTrac was released by pulling on the sheath while the endoscope was in the retroflexed position ([ Fig. 3 a ]). The rubber band was grasped by a rotatable clip, which could be reopened multiple times (SureClip mini; Micro-Tech, Nanjing, China). The clip was anchored to the mucosal incision site. Adjustment of traction was possible by pushing or pulling the sheath while changing the length of the string. Pushing the sheath to the oral side was useful for exposing the submucosal layer, resulting in easy creation of the mucosal flap ([ Fig. 3 b ]). Once the flap was created, the circumferential incision was completed and submucosal dissection was started. Pulling the sheath to the anal side was helpful for maintaining traction during this process ([ Fig. 3 c ]). En bloc resection was uneventfully accomplished. Fig. 3 Use of the EndoTrac device (Top, Tokyo, Japan) during endoscopic submucosal dissection. a The device was released by pulling the sheath while the endoscope was in a retroflexed position. b Pushing the sheath to the oral side was useful for exposing the submucosal layer. c Pulling the sheath to the anal side was helpful for maintaining the traction. Traction devices are useful in ESD, and manipulating the direction of tension during ESD is often desired to overcome challenging situations. Although this method may be challenging if insertion of the colonoscope is difficult and the lumen is too narrow for the retroflexed position, it enables us to deliver adjustable traction without endoscope reinsertion, and facilitates ESD for difficult lesions in the proximal colon. Endoscopy_UCTN_Code_TTT_1AQ_2AD Endoscopy E-Videos https://eref.thieme.de/e-videos E-Videos is an open access online section of the journal Endoscopy , reporting on interesting cases and new techniques in gastroenterological endoscopy. All papers include a high-quality video and are published with a Creative Commons CC-BY license. Endoscopy E-Videos qualify for HINARI discounts and waivers and eligibility is automatically checked during the submission process. We grant 100% waivers to articles whose corresponding authors are based in Group A countries and 50% waivers to those who are based in Group B countries as classified by Research4Life (see: https://www.research4life.org/access/eligibility/ ). This section has its own submission website at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/e-videos Publication History Article published online: 26 April 2023 © 2023. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndoscopySame topicOral and Maxillofacial PathologyFrench-language works237,207