Corticosteroid treatment of refractory Kawasaki disease.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the indications for corticosteroids in patients with Kawasaki disease (KD) treated by pediatric rheumatologists in Canada and to determine their efficacy on fever in patients with refractory KD. METHODS: All practicing pediatric rheumatologists in Canada identified KD patients treated with corticosteroids and completed a standard data form that included demographics, clinical and laboratory features, imaging studies, and therapeutic interventions, by chart review. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients with KD (14 female; 18 male: mean age 4.6 years) were treated with corticosteroids. Corticosteroids were used in 26 patients (81%) for persistent fever despite treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (refractory KD), 5 patients (19%) for congestive heart failure, and 1 patient for persistent acute phase symptoms other than fever. The 26 patients with refractory KD are the primary subject of this report. Twenty-two patients (85%) had rapid, sustained resolution of fever after corticosteroids. There were no serious reported adverse effects. Eight patients (31%) treated with corticosteroids developed coronary artery (CA) aneurysms and 9 (35%) developed CA dilatations without aneurysms. Of those who developed CA aneurysm, 4 had aneurysms detected prior to IV methylprednisolone (MP) on echocardiograms performed on days 6-27 (mean day 13) of illness. The remaining 4 patients had CA aneurysm detected after IVMP therapy, on echocardiograms performed on days 13-49 (mean day 23) of illness, 1-25 days (mean 9 days) after IVMP. In patients with one year or more of followup, 46% had resolution of CA abnormalities. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids are effective in the treatment of fever in most patients with IVIG-refractory KD. A multicenter prospective study is needed to determine the effect of corticosteroids on CA outcome in patients with refractory KD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".