Impact of timing of primary ileocecal resection on prognosis in patients with Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The advantage of early ileocecal resection after Crohn's disease diagnosis is a matter of debate. This study aims to assess the timing of ileocecal resection on prognosis, after correction for possible confounders. METHODS: Patients with Crohn's disease with primary ileocecal resection between 2000 and 2019 were included in a retrospective multicentre cohort. The primary endpoint was endoscopic recurrence (Rutgeerts score ≥i2b) within 18 months. Secondary endpoints were escalation of inflammatory bowel disease medication within 18 months and re-resection during follow-up. The association between timing of ileocecal resection and these endpoints was investigated using multivariable proportional hazard models, corrected for covariates including Montreal classification, postoperative prophylaxis, smoking, indication for surgery, medication before ileocecal resection, perianal fistulas, surgical approach, histology, length of resected segment and calendar year. RESULTS: In 822 patients ileocecal resection was performed after a median of 3.1 years (i.q.r. 0.7-8.0) after Crohn's disease diagnosis. The lowest incidence of endoscopic recurrence, escalation of inflammatory bowel disease medication and re-resection was observed for patients undergoing ileocecal resection shortly after diagnosis (0-1 months). After correction for covariates, patients with ileocecal resection at 0, 4 and 12 months after diagnosis had a cumulative incidence of 35 per cent, 48 per cent and 39 per cent for endoscopic recurrence, 20 per cent, 29 per cent and 28 per cent for escalation of inflammatory bowel disease medication and 20 per cent, 30 per cent and 34 per cent for re-resection, respectively. In the multivariable model ileocolonic disease (HR 1.39 (95 per cent c.i. 1.05 to 1.86)), microscopic inflammation of proximal and distal resection margins (HR 2.20 (95 per cent c.i. 1.21 to 3.87)) and postoperative prophylactic biological and immunomodulator (HR 0.16 (95 per cent c.i. 0.05 to 0.43)) were associated with endoscopic recurrence. CONCLUSION: The timing of ileocecal resection was not associated with a change of disease course; in the multivariable model, the postoperative recurrence was not affected by timing of ileocecal resection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".