Treatment of Bouveret syndrome with stone fragmentation using an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Video 1Treatment of Bouveret syndrome with stone fragmentation using an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife. A 61-year-old man with a 3-decade history of recurrent cholecystitis presented to the community emergency department with severe right upper quadrant pain. A CT scan was performed and revealed gangrenous cholecystitis with likely cholecystoduodenal fistulous communication.After discussion with the patient and the HPB team, the plan was made to attempt endoscopic extraction of the obstructing stone. This would be performed in the operating room, such that if endoscopic extraction was not possible, surgical management would proceed.During the endoscopy, 1 L of liquid material was suctioned and the retained solids were cleared as best as possible. The large obstructing stone was then seen in the duodenal cap. In the cap, we could appreciate the obstructing stone and the fistulous tract.We then passed a guidewire distal to the stone and advanced a 15- to 20-mm extraction balloon over the guidewire. The balloon was passed distal to the stone and inflated to 20 mm. We then applied firm, steady traction in an attempt to extract the stone.With the double-channel gastroscope, we passed a second wire and extraction balloon distal to the stone to increase the amount of traction that could be applied. Both balloons were inflated distal to the stone, and steady, firm traction was again applied. Unfortunately, this was not successful either.We then decided to use a regular ERCP needle knife to incise the stone. Because the knife was delicate, it was easily deformable, so we decided to switch to a triangle-tip knife.Using the "PreciseSECT" mode on the electrosurgical unit, the stone was repeatedly incised. Particular care was taken to avoid flinging the knife and damaging the duodenal wall.Saline was used as the irrigation solution to ensure electrosurgical conductivity when the current was applied.At this point, we could appreciate fragmentation of the stones after repeated incision.After about 3 hours of stone incision and fragmentation, the guidewire was passed beyond the stone; the extraction balloon was advanced over the wire; and the balloon was again inflated with steady traction applied. This time, the stone was successfully extracted from the stomach.The duodenum was then examined. There were no remaining large pieces of stone or any significant mucosal damage or perforation.Using a mechanical lithotripter, the remaining larger fragments of stone were fragmented and extracted. However, because the stone had a large diameter, lithotripsy at the center was not initially possible, and the smaller lateral aspects had to be performed until the stone was completely fragmented.This case demonstrates the incision and fragmentation of a massive gallstone with the use of an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife and electrosurgical unit.With cautious application of this technique, successful endoscopic management of a large gallstone causing Bouveret syndrome was achieved. This technique avoided open surgical management and allowed for elective cholecystectomy at a later date with less morbidity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".