Post-Pancreaticoduodenectomy Jejunal Perforation and Pancreatic Fistula Caused by Pancreatic Intraductal Stent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a highly dangerous complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). In this case, a pancreatic intraductal stent was inserted into the pancreatic duct after PD, and the pancreatic intraductal stent punctured the intestinal wall, resulting in POPF. Pancreatic fistula and digestive tract perforation for this reason have not been reported clinically and have certain significance. We present a case of a male patient who underwent PD for a malignant pancreatic tumor. He was admitted for treatment due to recurrent hematemesis and melena postoperatively. Abdominal imaging and biochemical and cytological examinations of ascitic fluid suggest that the patient may have POPF and gastrointestinal perforation. After a series of treatments, the patient's pancreatic fistula and abdominal infection did not improve. After consultation with the patient's family, they decided to refuse further treatment and the patient was discharged. Traditional pancreatic intraductal stents may not necessarily reduce postoperative complications and may also lead to potential adverse reactions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".