MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2196730350 · doi:10.1093/pch/18.6.305

Case 1: Man’s best friend?

2013· article· en· W2196730350 sur OpenAlexaff
Brianna McKelvie, Noni E. MacDonald

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Établissements canadiensIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyPsychoanalysisMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A previously healthy six-week-old female infant presented with a one-day history of fever and irritability. She had a history of rhinorrhea and cough for 10 days before presentation. Further history revealed slightly decreased oral intake and loose, nonbloody stools. A normal number of wet diapers had been maintained. Both parents had been sick with rhinorrhea and sore throats. The infant’s father had also experienced a recently active cold sore. The infant lived at home with her parents. There were no siblings or family pets. The week before presentation they had been visiting with friends who had a dog that licked the patient many times. The travel history was noncontributory. The infant’s medical history was unremarkable. She was the product of an uncomplicated pregnancy, born at term by caesarean section due to failure to progress. Her birth weight was 3.75 kg. There were no infectious concerns during the perinatal period. Development and growth were normal to date. She had been exclusively breastfed, was not taking medications or supplements, and had no known drug allergies. Initial assessment revealed a nontoxic but irritable infant weighing 4.7 kg (50th to 75th percentile). Length and head circumference were not measured. The vital signs were as follows: temperature 38.8°C (rectal), heart rate 203 beats/min (crying), blood pressure 88/37 mmHg, respiratory rate 40 breaths/min, O2 saturation 97% on room air. Physical examination was unremarkable including the anterior fontanelle, which was soft and flat. Initial laboratory testing revealed a hemoglobin level of 119 g/L, platelet count of 426×109/L (normal range 150×109/L to 400×109/L), white blood cell count of 16.7×109/L with 58% neutrophils, 17% bands and 22% lymphocytes, and a C-reactive protein level of 57.9 mg/L. Urinalysis was negative for nitrites and leukocytes. Urine and blood samples were sent for routine bacterial culture. Analysis of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) demonstrated a cloudy liquid with protein 0.33 g/L, glucose 2.93 mmol/L, red blood cell count 214×106/L, and white blood cell count 1221×106/L with 83.5% neutrophils, 6% bands and 1.0% lymphocytes. The Gram stain was negative. A CSF sample was sent for routine bacterial culture and molecular viral testing, and empirical treatment with intravenous cefotaxime, ampicillin and intravenous acyclovir was initiated. A diagnostic report was received after 24 h. The CSF culture grew Pasteurella multocida. After the results of antibiotic sensitivity tests were returned, ampicillin was discontinued on day 6 of admission and cefotaxime was continued for a 14-day course. A repeat lumbar puncture was performed on day 4 of admission, and the culture was negative. The Infectious Disease service was consulted to guide therapy and the patient was seen as an outpatient by the immunology department to rule out an underlying immunodeficiency. The infant’s age, in combination with extensive contact with a dog, was considered to be an explanation for her illness. P multocida is a rare but serious cause of neonatal meningitis. P multocida is a pleomorphic Gram-negative coccobacillus found in the mouths of many species of animals, particularly cats (70% to 90%) and dogs (50% to 66%). In humans, it is the most common cause of infection after a dog bite, but is also known to cause bacteremia, pneumonia, septic arthritis, conjunctivitis and meningitis (1). To date, 38 cases of infant P multocida meningitis have been reported in the English-language literature. The age was known for 36 of the cases, and 30 infants were ≤3 months of age. Of all 38 cases, 31 patients (82%) had been exposed to animals and, of those exposures, 27 (87%) were nontraumatic and only four (13%) were traumatic (eg, bites or scratches). The most likely route of transmission when the contact is nontraumatic is from exposure to the animal’s oropharyngeal secretions. This exposure can come from direct licking or sniffing, or from being handled by someone who did not wash their hands after contact with a pet. The neonate may then develop pharyngeal colonization with P multocida, which can be followed by invasion and hematogenous spread to the meninges (2). Complications from P multocida meningitis are similar to other causes of meningitis and include seizures, hemiparesis, brain abscesses, hydrocephalus and, rarely, death (two cases reported). Therefore, although P multocida is a relatively rare cause of neonatal meningitis, the consequences are potentially devastating (2). With this in mind, it is recommended that very young infants should not come in contact with the saliva of cats or dogs, and that anyone in contact with pets should wash their hands before handling an infant. Pacifiers that may have come in contact with an animal should be thoroughly washed before use. These simple measures will help prevent future cases of neonatal P multocida meningitis (1,2). The present case also raises the issue of indications for repeat lumbar puncture. For our patient, a lumbar puncture was repeated on day 4 of treatment. Resultant CSF analysis demonstrated a reduced white blood cell count of 18 × 106/L, with a shift to a lymphocyte predominance of 60%. Notably, the CSF bacterial culture from this repeat lumbar puncture was negative. There is very little evidence to guide clinicians on whether to repeat a lumbar puncture in cases of bacterial meningitis. The Canadian Paediatric Society recommends repeating a lumbar puncture in patients who fail to improve clinically within 24 h to 36 h on antibiotics, in immunocompromised patients in whom the success of antibiotic therapy cannot be assured, in patients with meningitis caused by a gram-negative enteric bacillus, and in patients with meningitis caused by penicillin- or cephalosporin-resistant pneumococcus. If the repeat lumbar puncture reveals evidence of untreated or partially treated infection, reassessment of antimicrobial therapy is required. Anticipatory guidance to new parents should include keeping very young infants away from cats and dogs. In addition, anyone in contact with animals should wash their hands before handling the infant and pacifiers should be cleaned before use. It should be emphasized that even nontraumatic contact with pets can lead to infection. There is little evidence to guide physicians on when to repeat a lumbar puncture. The Canadian Paediatric Society recommends repeating a lumbar puncture in patients who fail to improve within 24 h to 36 h on antibiotics, in immunocompromised patients, in patients with meningitis caused by a Gram-negative enteric bacillus, and in patients with meningitis caused by penicillin- or cephalosporin-resistant pneumococcus.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Étude de cas · Signal consensuel: Étude de cas
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,021
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,069

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0030,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,002
Communication savante0,0030,005
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0150,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0210,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,267
Écart entre enseignants0,251 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeÉtude de cas
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child HealthMême sujetChild Abuse and Related TraumaTravaux en français237 207