Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy for the Eldest Elderly Patients with Gastric Cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The number of the eldest elderly (aged 85 years and older) patients with gastric cancer has been rising in Japan. Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) has been accepted as a less invasive treatment for gastric cancer. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LADG for eldest elderly patents. METHODOLOGY: From January 2006 to July 2010, 262 patients underwent LADG for gastric cancer. Of these, 9 patients were 85 years old and over (eldest elderly group) and the remaining 253 patients were younger than 85 years (control group). Clinicopathological characteristics and operative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Among clinicopathological characteristics analyzed in this study (gender, body mass index, co-morbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status and tumor status), only gender showed a significant difference between the eldest elderly and the control groups. There were no significant differences in operation time, blood loss, postoperative complication and postoperative hospital stay between the 2 groups. No serious complications or mortality were found in the eldest elderly group. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that LADG is a safe and efficient procedure for the treatment of gastric cancer, even in eldest elderly patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".