Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Effectiveness of Fibrin Sealant Application on the Development of Staple Line Complications After Sleeve Gastrectomy

International audienc

Identifying Patients Eligible for a Short Hospital Stay After Stoma Closure

Introduction: The implementation of enhanced recovery programmes after elective colorectal surgery has dramatically reduced the length of stay. The objective of this study was to assess the selection of good candidates for short post-operative stay (GCSS) in the context of stoma closure. Methods: Between January 2011 and December 2014, 222 patients were included in the present retrospective, single-center study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of GCSS. We also identified factors associated with GCSS status and built a predictive score. Results: The study population was predominantly male (n = 122, 55%). 60% of the patients had undergone ileostomy and 85% had undergone hand-sewn anastomosis. The postoperative ileus rate was 5% and the readmission rate was 3.5%. 41% (n = 92) of the study population were considered to be GCSS. In a multivariate analysis, age under 50 (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 2.8 [1.2-5.6], p = 0.008), the absence of vascular comorbidities (OR [95%CI] = 3.2 [1.3-12.3]; p = 0.006) and stapled anastomosis (OR: 4.2, 95%CI: 1.1-17.3, p = 0.03) were associated with GCSS status. Predictive scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 were associated with GCSS rates of 20%, 18%, 44%, and 62%, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In the context of stoma closure, 41% of patients were GCSS

Feasibility, safety and efficacy of two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar liver metastases of colorectal cancer: a LiverMetSurvey analysis.

BACKGROUND: The combination of liver resection and chemotherapy has become the standard of care for colorectal liver metastases (LM). The objective of the present study was to evaluate the impact of two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) on the long-term survival of patients with bilobar LM. METHODS: We included adult (over-18) patients from the LiverMetSurvey registry with confirmed multiple colorectal LM and having undergone either one-stage hepatectomy or TSH with curative intent. The "TSH (2/2)" group (n = 625) comprised patients having completed both stages of TSH; the "TSH (1/2)" group (n = 244) comprised patients having undergone only the first stage of TSH; the "hepatectomy" group. The primary outcome criterion was the overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were the morbidity and mortality rates. RESULTS: The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were respectively 3.8% and 9.3% in the TSH (2/2) group, 9.4% and 16.4% in the TSH (1/2) group, and 5.4% and 9.1% in the "hepatectomy" group. The three-year OS rate was 45% in the TSH (2/2) group, 30% in the TSH (1/2) group and 50.7% in the hepatectomy group. CONCLUSION: The LiverMetSurvey registry's data indicate that TSH is associated with rather good long-term survival and acceptable morbidity and mortality rates

Satisfaction rate of patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy as day-case surgery compared to conventional hospitalization: a prospective non-randomized study

International audiencePurpose Day-case surgery (DCS) has boomed over recent years. However, day-case bariatric surgery remains controversial due to a lack of evaluation. The objective of this study was to compare the experiences and satisfaction with general anesthesia of patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) as DCS compared to conventional hospitalization. Methods Between January 2015 and June 2016, all patients undergoing primary SG as day-case surgery or with conventional hospitalization were prospectively included in this non-randomized, non-inferiority study comparing the level of satisfaction of patients undergoing SG with conventional hospitalization (CH group, gold standard) versus SG as DCS (DCS group). The primary efficacy endpoint was comparison of the overall satisfaction rate using the EVAN-G questionnaire. The secondary endpoints were evaluation of the 6 dimensions of the EVAN-G questionnaire, discharge from hospital, adhesion with SG management and overall satisfaction with SG. Results One-hundred and twenty-four patients met the inclusion criteria (62 in both groups). The DCS group was younger with fewer comorbidities (p <= 0.01) and had a lower BMI (p <= 0.01). Overall, the mean EVAN-G questionnaire score was 66.4 (63.9-68.9) for the DCS group and 68.9 (65.9-71.8) for the CH group (non-inferiority of DCS group). In the DCS group, 19% of patients would have preferred to spend the night in hospital, while 82% of patients in the CH group would have preferred DCS and a total of 75% of patients reported a high level of satisfaction. Conclusion Overall satisfaction of patients undergoing SG as day-case surgery was not inferior to that of patients managed by conventional hospitalization

Benefits of Laparoscopic Approach for Resection of Liver Tumors in Cirrhotic Patients

International audienceIntroduction: Liver resection in cirrhotic patients is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to compare short-term results of laparoscopic resection (LR) and open surgery (OS) for minor liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) hepatocellularcarcinoma on nontumor cirrhotic liver (HCC/F4) and patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLMs) colorectal liver metastases on healthy liver (CRLM/F0). Materials and Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2014, all patients undergoing liver resection (n=754) were included in this study. Liver resections for cholangiocarcinoma or benign tumor, major liver resection (3 segments), HCC on healthy liver, CRLM on cirrhotic liver, and liver resection with technically difficult accessibility (segments I, VII, and VIII) were excluded. The primary endpoint of the study was a validated composite endpoint (CEP), which included specific liver surgery complications (Clavien III), allowing comparison of the postoperative course after LR versus OR for HCC/F4 patients and CRLM/F0 patients using propensity score (PS) analysis. Secondary endpoints were major postoperative morbidity according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (III) and intensive care unit (ICU) length of hospital stay (LOS) and overall LOS. The test group was defined as HCC/F4 patients operated by LR, and the control group was defined as HCC/F4 patients and CRLM/F0 patients operated by OS and CRLM/F0 patient operated by LR. Results: Sixty patients (38.7%) underwent LR and 95 patients (61.3%) underwent OS. Surgery was performed for CRLM in 93 patients (60%) and for HCC in 62 patients (40%). No difference was demonstrated between HCC/F4 patients and CRLM/F0 patients in the LR group in terms of the CEP (7% versus 18.1%; P=.23), while a significant difference for the CEP was observed between HCC/F4 patients and CRLM/F0 patients after OS (50% versus 21%; P=.021). A higher rate of CEP was observed for HCC/F4 patients operated by OS compared to HCC/F4 patients operated by LR (50% versus 7.8%; P=.009). No significant difference in Clavien-Dindo score III was observed between HCC/F4 patients and CRLM/F0 patients operated by LR (10% versus 4.5%; P=.98). A higher postoperative ascites rate was observed for HCC/F4 patients operated by OS compared to CRLM/F0 patients operated by OS (25% versus 2.8%; P=.006). This difference was no longer observed when HCC/F4 patients were compared to CRLM/F0 operated by LR (7.8% versus 2.8%; P=.09). The postoperative mortality rate was 1.8% and was not correlated with nontumor liver or surgical approach. A shorter LOS was observed for HCC/F4 patients operated by LR compared to HCC/F4 patients operated by OS (7.53 versus 17.13; P=.011). Conclusion: The laparoscopic approach for malignant liver tumor is associated with a lower specific complication rate. LR for HCC/F4 could eliminate excess morbidity and decrease LOS in patients with cirrhotic liver