MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117453479 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znaf270.316

118 The Rolling Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Management of Gallstone Ileus

2025· article· en· W7117453479 on OpenAlex
Deelan Vadher, Adele Zacken, Viraj Shah, Mohamad Silmi, Luis Aguilar, Kejal Patel, Murtuza Aliasgar Calcuttawala, Poyyamozhi Rajagopal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiliary and Gastrointestinal Fistulas
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGallstone ileusGallstonesMEDLINECholecystectomyOdds ratioFistulaSystematic reviewProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Gallstone ileus is a rare but serious complication caused by gallstones entering the gastrointestinal tract, often necessitating surgical intervention. Surgical options include enterolithotomy alone, enterolithotomy combined with cholecystectomy, and enterolithotomy with fistula closure. However, there is no consensus on which approach yields the best outcomes regarding mortality, morbidity, and operative time. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare these surgical strategies. Method Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was performed across Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed for studies published after 2000. Two reviewers independently screened eligible studies and extracted relevant data. Study quality was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Ten studies including 293 patients were included. Primary outcomes analysed were mortality and morbidity; secondary outcome was operative time. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated using fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using I² and τ² statistics. Subgroup analyses explored differences among surgical approaches. Results Combined enterolithotomy and cholecystectomy was associated with significantly lower mortality (OR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.87–3.04; I² = 33%) compared to enterolithotomy alone (OR: 3.09; 95% CI: 1.36–7.02; I² = 69%). Enterolithotomy with fistula repair demonstrated the highest morbidity risk (OR: 4.92; 95% CI: 3.38–7.14; I² = 0%). Operative time was significantly longer for combined procedures (MD: 62.47 minutes; 95% CI: 60.14–64.81). Subgroup differences were statistically significant (p < 0.01). Conclusions Enterolithotomy combined with cholecystectomy may improve mortality despite increased operative duration. These findings support tailored surgical approaches and highlight the need for prospective studies to determine optimal management.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.243 · 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