MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417034291 · doi:10.1093/bjsopen/zraf149

Classification of postoperative pancreatic fistula after left pancreatectomy: international multicentre cohort study

2025· article· en· W4417034291 on OpenAlexaff
Akseli Bonsdorff, William Yu, Jakob Kirkegård, Charles de Ponthaud, Trond Kjeseth, Poya Ghorbani, Johanna Wennerblom, Caroline Williamsson, Alexandra W. Acher, Manoj Thillai, Timo Tarvainen, Aki Uutela, Jukka Sirén, Arto Kokkola, Dyre Kleive, Mushegh А. Sahakyan, Rolf E Hagen, Andrea Lund, M. Nielsen, Richard Fristedt, Christina Biörserud, Svein Olav Bratlie, Bobby Tingstedt, Knut Jørgen Labori, Sébastien Gaujoux, Stephen J. Wigmore, Julie Hallet, Ernesto Sparrelid, Ville Sallinen

Bibliographic record

VenueBJS Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersMary och Georg C. Ehrnrooths StiftelseSyöpäsäätiöSuomen Lääketieteen Säätiö
KeywordsPancreatic fistulaGrading (engineering)Cohort studyRetrospective cohort studyCohortClinical significance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major complication after left pancreatectomy. The current International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery classification has limitations, including heterogeneity in morbidity and high interobserver variability. This study aimed to assess POPF-related morbidity after left pancreatectomy and propose a refined classification system. METHODS: Patients undergoing left pancreatectomy at nine high-volume centres between January 2010 and April 2023 were included. All postoperative treatments and interventions related to POPF were collected. The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) was used to assess total cumulative morbidity. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery B POPF was subclassified (B1 = prolonged drainage, B2 = pharmacological intervention, B3 = percutaneous intervention, B4 = endoscopic or angiographic intervention). A new POPF grading system was developed by combining subclasses with similar morbidity. RESULTS: Among 2284 patients, 497 (21.8%) had B (B1: 48 (2.1%), B2: 135 (5.9%), B3: 175 (7.7%), B4: 99 (4.3%)) or C (40 (1.8%)) POPF. Median (interquartile range) POPF-related CCI was 33.5 (22.6-39.7). A significant overlap existed between B and C POPF in terms of CCI. Median CCI (i.q.r.) increased with the B POPF subclasses (B1-B4), 8.7 (8.7-8.7) - 22.6 (20.9-22.6) - 33.5 (33.5-34.6) - 47.4 (39.7-52.1) (P < 0.001), but no difference between B4 POPF and C POPF was observed (median CCI 47.4 versus 50.2; P = 0.265). The refined POPF grading system consists of grades 0 (including biochemical leak and B1), A (including B2), B (including B3), and C (including B4 and C) reflecting worsening morbidity. CONCLUSION: The current International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery classification includes highly heterogeneous grade B POPF cases, ranging from minimal to severe morbidity. The refined grading system improves classification and clinical relevance by aligning POPF severity with morbidity and short-term outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJS OpenSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207