Clinical features and evolution of paraduodenal (groove) pancreatitis: A multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The pathogenesis and natural history of paraduodenal (groove) pancreatitis (PP) remain unclear, and treatment includes medical therapy, interventional endoscopy, and surgery. This is a multicenter study to explore the burden of the disease, its clinical course, and response to treatment. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from both academic and nonacademic Italian centers. All patients diagnosed with PP were included in the study. Data were recorded at the time of diagnosis and follow-up. RESULTS: 208 patients (87.5 % male) from 16 centers were recruited. The median age at diagnosis was 50.5 (IQR 13 years), and the mean time from clinical presentation to diagnosis was 18 (±29) months. 90.6 % (n = 107) had a history of alcohol abuse and 90.7 % (n = 185) had smoked. Thirty-six patients (17.9 %) had diabetes at diagnosis, while 80 patients (41.5 %) had chronic pancreatitis. Six (3 %) patients were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer after a mean time of 10.3 (±10.8) months from the PP diagnosis. Forty-nine patients (24.9 %) had pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) at diagnosis, while 45(24.3 %) developed PEI during follow-up. Conservative treatment was administered in 103 (54.5 %) cases, surgery in 52 (27.5 %), and endoscopic therapy in 34 (18 %). The mean follow-up was 41.1 (±31.92) months. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol consumption and smoking are major risk factors for PP. Diabetes and PEI commonly develop in these patients. Conservative treatment strategies are often successful.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".