Extended mesenteric resection in Crohn’s disease: EXCEED Study Protocol—a blinded multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Crohn's disease presents a persistent challenge, particularly concerning disease recurrence in patients after previous intestinal resection. This recurrence often necessitates additional medical treatment or surgery, imposing a substantial burden on patients, healthcare systems, and society. Emerging evidence suggests that extended mesenteric excision may reduce recurrence. The EXCEED study aims to investigate the mesentery's influence on disease recurrence in Crohn's disease. METHODS/DESIGN: Blinded multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial involving 208 patients. Patients will undergo randomization into two groups: Group A, the treatment group, will receive extended mesenteric resection, while Group B, the control group, will undergo the standard resection with the mesentery largely preserved. Stratification will occur based on preoperative medicinal treatment categories (none, immunological, biological) and the treatment facility at the time of inclusion. This randomized controlled trial will incorporate blinding procedures, with the understanding that due to the nature of this interventional surgical study, the operating surgeon cannot be blinded. Primary endpoint is endoscopic signs of recurrence, defined as a modified Rutgeerts score > i2a, at the 12-month follow-up ileo-colonoscopy. Secondary endpoints include clinical recurrence at 6 and 12 months, as well as recurrence at 3 and 5 years postoperatively. Tertiary endpoints are; impact of disease severity at the time of operation, according to the Montreal classification, impact of biological treatment on recurrence rates, postoperative complications burden according to the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI), patient reported outcome through questionnaires (5Q-5D-5L and SIBDQ) and cost-effectiveness analysis. DISCUSSION: This study addresses a critical gap in Crohn's disease literature, aiming to provide evidence on the impact of extended mesenteric excision in preventing disease recurrence, thereby contributing to enhanced patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06324838. Registered on 04/02/2024.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
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 | 0.026 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".