In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[Q]: Context: Benign esophageal strictures are frequently encountered pathologies occurring due to various reasons. Repeated dilatations may be needed, particularly in resistant strictures. This study aimed to evaluate patients who underwent repeated dilatations in our clinic due to resistant esophageal strictures.', 'Sixteen patients who underwent multiple dilatations in our clinic with the diagnosis of resistant benign esophageal stricture between 2007 and 2014 were studied for age, sex, etiology, symptoms, complications, number of dilatations, and intervals between dilatations. Under general anesthesia, all patients underwent dilatation with Savary-Gilliard bougie dilators with the help of rigid esophagoscopy.', 'In 10 of the patients, stenosis was cervical, and in others it was in the thoracic esophagus. The mean dilatation performance was 4.4 (range: 3-12). In 9 patients, dilatations were performed when the patients presented with the complaint of dysphagia. Following the initial dilatation performed for dysphagia, 7 patients underwent endoscopy and dilatation 3-5 times with 1-week intervals without waiting for the development of dysphagia symptoms. These patients developed no complications, and no stenting was needed. In 5 patients, restenosis developed despite multiple dilatations, and esophageal stent placement was performed.\Question: Is recurrent dilatation in resistant benign esophageal strictures : timing significant?
[A]: Dilatations performed at frequent intervals without waiting for the symptoms of dysphagia can contribute to safer and more effective results in resistant benign esophageal strictures.


[Q]: Context: Trauma centers are currently benchmarked on mortality outcomes alone. However, pay-for-performance measures may financially penalize centers based on complications. Our objective was to determine whether the results would be similar to the current standard method of mortality-based benchmarking if trauma centers were profiled on complications.', 'We analyzed data from the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2010. Patients 16 years or older with blunt or penetrating injuries and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 9 or higher were included. Risk-adjusted observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratios for each center were generated and used to rank each facility as high, average, or low performing. We similarly ranked facilities on O/E morbidity ratios defined as occurrence of any major complication. Concordance between hospital performance rankings was evaluated using a weighted κ statistic. Correlation between morbidity- and mortality-based O/E ratios was assessed using Pearson coefficients. Sensitivity analyses were performed to mitigate the competing risk of death for the morbidity analyses.', 'A total of 449,743 patients from 248 facilities were analyzed. The unadjusted morbidity and mortality rates were 10.0% and 6.9%, respectively. No correlation was found between morbidity- and mortality-based O/E ratios (r = -0.01). Only 40% of the centers had similar performance rankings for both mortality and morbidity. Of the 31 high performers for mortality, only 11 centers were also high performers for morbidity. A total of 78 centers were ranked as average, and 11 ranked as low performers on both outcomes. Comparison of hospital performance status using mortality and morbidity outcomes demonstrated poor concordance (weighted κ = 0.03, p = 0.22).\Question: Does benchmarking trauma centers on mortality alone reflect quality of care : implications for pay-for-performance?
[A]: Mortality-based external benchmarking does not identify centers with high complication rates. This creates a dichotomy between current trauma center profiling standards and measures used for pay-for-performance. A benchmarking mechanism that reflects all measures of quality is needed.


[Q]: Context: A Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) is usually performed during live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) when a duct-to-duct reconstruction is not possible. However, direct anastomosis of the bile duct to the duodenum (hepaticoduodenostomy [HD]) is an alternative technique for biliary repair that has been previously used for conventional biliary surgery and at our center for cadaveric liver transplant. We provide the first evidence that HD is an alternative technique for biliary reconstruction in LDLT.', 'We performed a total of 71 LDLT between 2002 and 2008. An end-to-end anastomosis was used in 30 patients. Forty-one patients had a biliary enteric anastomosis in which seven were reconstructed with an HD. Accessory ducts were fashioned into a common duct or implanted into the duodenum separately.', 'There were no patient deaths or retransplants in a follow-up period that ranged from 90 to 771 days after surgery. One patient was diagnosed with cholangitis that responded to intravenous antibiotics and removal of the stent by endoscopy.\Question: Is hepaticoduodenostomy an alternative to Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy for biliary reconstruction in live donor liver transplantation?
[A]:
This preliminary case series suggests that that HD is a feasible alternative to HJ biliary anastomosis when a duct-to-duct anastomosis cannot be performed. HD offers the possible advantage of simple postoperative access to the biliary system by endoscopy and avoids complications caused by HJ bowel anastomosis.