MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409094362 · doi:10.7759/cureus.81612

Endoscopic Duodenal Stenting for Iatrogenic Stapfer Type I Duodenal Perforation: An Alternative to Surgical Repair

2025· article· en· W4409094362 on OpenAlexaff
Ishraq Joarder, Shukria Ahmadi, Fahd Jowhari

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal and GI Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalCanadian Association of Nurses in OncologyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerforationSurgeryDuodenumDuodenal DiseasesStentGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an essential therapeutic tool but carries risks of serious complications, including luminal perforation. Stapfer Type I perforations, involving lateral or medial duodenal wall tears, are traditionally managed surgically with high associated morbidity/mortality. Here, we report the first documented case to our knowledge of an iatrogenic post-dilation Stapfer Type I duodenal perforation successfully managed with placement of a fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (Fc-SEMS). An 87-year-old female with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, hypertension, and hypothyroidism presented with cholestatic transaminitis and suspected biliary obstruction. Endoscopic evaluation during ERCP revealed a pre-ampullary peptic duodenal stricture not traversable with the duodenoscope. Endoscopic dilation with a CRE balloon led to a duodenal perforation and a through-the-scope duodenal Fc-SEMS was deployed bridging the perforation. The patient demonstrated rapid clinical and radiologic improvement, with full recovery and successful stent removal in two months. This case highlights Fc-SEMS as a viable, less invasive alternative to surgery for high-risk patients who have sustained a duodenal perforation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicEsophageal and GI PathologyFrench-language works237,207