Colonic Anastomotic Leak Model in Swine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Anastomotic leaks (ALs) are serious postoperative complications. Current experimental studies designed to investigate leaks are based on acute intraoperative dehiscence of the anastomosis. Clinically, however, AL usually happens later in the postoperative course. Presented here is a clinically relevant colonic AL model in swine. METHODS: Seventeen Yorkshire pigs were divided into 2 groups: the control group (n = 6) and the experimental group (n = 11). An enterotomy was performed on the descending colon and an end-to-end handsewn anastomosis was created in the groups. The proximal and distal ends of the suture were exteriorized and tied to a plastic tube. Subsequently, the suture was cut and pulled to induce breakdown of the anastomosis in the experimental group 3-4 h postoperatively. Study endpoints included behavioral changes, clinical assessment, laboratory indicators, and macroscopic indicators of leakage. RESULTS: Leaks were successfully created in 8/11 of the experimental group animals and confirmed through exploratory relaparotomy. Seven of the experimental pigs showed complete anastomotic breakdown and one showed partial rupture. Fecal peritonitis and enteric spillage were observed macroscopically within the abdomen of the experimental pigs, confirming the presence of a leak. The remaining (3/11) experimental pigs did not experience those findings due to either a tamponade/containment by the abdominal wall or surrounding organs. Statistical significance (p < 0.05) was achieved between the experimental and control cohorts for laboratory and clinical indicators including fever, leukocytosis, and decreased blood potassium. CONCLUSION: This animal model generated postoperative induced leak in approximately three-quarters (8/11) of experimental pigs, allowing control over the time of leak onset to simulate clinical settings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".