Short‐term outcomes of surgical treatment for primary ileocaecal Crohn's disease: Results of the Crohn's(urg) study, a multicentre, retrospective, comparative analysis between inflammatory and complicated phenotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Recent evidence challenges the current standard of offering surgery to patients with ileocaecal Crohn's disease (CD) only when they present complications of the disease. The aim of this study was to compare short-term results of patients who underwent primary ileocaecal resection for either inflammatory (luminal disease, earlier in the disease course) or complicated phenotypes, hypothesizing that the latter would be associated with worse postoperative outcomes. METHOD: A retrospective, multicentre comparative analysis was performed including patients operated on for primary ileocaecal CD at 12 referral centres. Patients were divided into two groups according to indication of surgery for inflammatory (ICD) or complicated (CCD) phenotype. Short-term results were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2013 patients were included, with 291 (14.5%) in the ICD group. No differences were found between the groups in time from diagnosis to surgery. CCD patients had higher rates of low body mass index, anaemia (40.9% vs. 27%, p < 0.001) and low albumin (11.3% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001). CCD patients had longer operations, lower rates of laparoscopic approach (84.3% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.001) and higher conversion rates (9.3% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001). CCD patients had a longer hospital stay and higher postoperative complication rates (26.1% vs. 21.3%, p = 0.083). Anastomotic leakage and reoperations were also more frequent in this group. More patients in the CCD group required an extended bowel resection (14.1% vs. 8.3%, p: 0.017). In multivariate analysis, CCD was associated with prolonged surgery (OR 3.44, p = 0.001) and the requirement for multiple intraoperative procedures (OR 8.39, p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: Indication for surgery in patients who present with an inflammatory phenotype of CD was associated with better outcomes compared with patients operated on for complications of the disease. There was no difference between groups in time from diagnosis to surgery.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".