MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161771461 · doi:10.82308/30166

Pancreatic fistulas after pancreatico-duodenectomies: are pancreatico-gastrostomies safer than pancreatico-jejunostomies? a quasi-experiment and propensity-score adjusted analysis

2014· dissertation· en· W7161771461 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jad Abou Khalil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIatrogenic diseaseEndoscopic surgeryTransplant surgeryNegative therapeutic reaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXTE les fistules pacreatiques (PF) constituent une cause significative de la morbiditée et mortalité subie par les patients qui recoivent une pancreaticoduodenectomie (PD). La technique ideale pour retablir la continuité pancreatico-enterique est inconnue. Il n'est pas donné que les Pancreatico-Gastrostomies (PG) donne moi de PF et de complications post-operatives que les Pancreatico-Jejunostomies(PJ). BUT: Nous avons comparé le profile de complications post-operatoire chez les patients ayant subi une PG or PJ apres PD au Centre Universitaire de Sante McGill. METHODOLOGIE: Nous avons collecté des données pre-operatoires ainsi que les complications post- operatoires pour les patients ayant subi une PD dans notre base de données entre 1999 et 2011 et ayant subi une reconstruction par PG ou PJ. Nous avons performé une regression logistique ajustée pour un" propensity-score" pour identifier l'effet de la technique chirurgicale sur les PF, les delais de la motilitée gastrique (DGE), et les complications totales. nous avons utilisé les classifications ISGPF et Strasberg et Linehan pour PF et la definition ISGPS pour DGE. La morbidité totale a été evaluée par la classification Clavien-Dindo et l'Index Comprehensif de Morbidité (CCI). RESULTATS 23/103 et 20/103 (p=0.49) des patients ont developpé une PF et 74/103 et 55/103 patients ont eu DGE en periode post operatoire dans les groupes PG et PJ respectivement (p=0.02). Le grade Clavien-Dindo des complications n'etait pas different entre les groupes (p=0.29) mais le CCI l'etait (38.4 vs. 31.4 for PG vs. PG respectivement, p=0.02.) l'analyse multivariable ajustée pour le "Propensity-score" n'a pas montré d'effet de la technique chirurgical sur PF (p=0.89), DGE grades B/C (p=0.9) ou CCI (p=0.41) mais il restait un effet sur le DGE de toutes les grades de severité (p=0.012.) CONCLUSION Les patients ayant recu une PG n'avaient pas moins de PF que ceux ayant recu une PJ aprés PD a notre institution; Les deux groupes ont souffert du meme profile de complications, mais le groupe PG avait plus de DGE de toutes grades.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→