Thoracoscopic resection of lung masses is associated with excellent survival to discharge and good long-term outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report and evaluate risk factors for conversion and perioperative and long-term outcomes in dogs undergoing thoracoscopic lung lobectomy for resection of lung masses. ANIMALS: 61 client-owned dogs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study (June 11, 2008, to February 14, 2020) of data collected from medical records included signalment, results of diagnostic imaging, surgical technique, surgical and anesthesia time, mass location and size, hospitalization time, histopathologic findings, and long-term outcome. Follow-up was obtained from medical records and telephone contact with owners or referring veterinarians. RESULTS: Histopathology results were available for 60 of 61 tumors. Fifty-seven (95%) were considered primary lung tumors, of which 46 (81%) were carcinomas. Clean surgical margins were achieved in 46 of 52 (88%) dogs. Conversion from thoracoscopy to thoracoscopic-assisted or open surgery occurred in 16 of 61 (26%) dogs. Larger tumor diameter (≥ 5 cm) and lymphadenopathy detected by preoperative CT scan were significantly associated with increased risk of conversion. There was no association between conversion and patient weight, body condition score, and tumor location. All 61 dogs survived to discharge, and 56 of 57 were alive 1 month postoperatively. Median overall survival time was 311 days (95% CI, 224 to 570 days). Tracheobronchial lymphadenopathy on preoperative CT scans was associated with shorter postoperative survival (P < .001). Patient age, tumor diameter, adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery, and incomplete margins were not associated with survival time. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dogs had high survival to discharge and good long-term prognosis following thoracoscopic lung lobectomy. However, larger tumor size and tracheobronchial lymphadenopathy may increase the likelihood of conversion.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".