MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973630094 · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318226727f

Clinical Outcome of a Randomized Controlled Blinded Trial of Open Versus Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication in Infants and Children

2011· article· en· W1973630094 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Merrill McHoney, Angie M. Wade, Simon Eaton, Richard F. Howard, Edward M. Kiely, David P. Drake, Joe Curry, Agostino Pierro

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMedicineNissen fundoplicationLaparoscopyRandomized controlled trialSurgeryAnesthesiaDysphagiaLaparoscopic surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Objective: To compare the clinical outcome and endocrine response in children who were randomized to open or laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication using minimization. Background: It is assumed that laparoscopic surgery is associated with less pain, quicker recovery and dampened endocrine response. Few randomized studies have been performed in children. Methods: Parents gave informed consent, and this study was approved and registered (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00231543). Anesthesia, postoperative analgesia and feeding were standardized. Parents and staff were blinded to allocation. Blood was taken for markers of endocrine response. Results: Twenty open and 19 laparoscopic patients were comparable with respect to age, weight, neurological status, and presence of congenital anomalies. Median time to full feeds was 2 days in both groups (P = 0.85); hospital stay was 4.5 days in the open group versus 5.0 days in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.57). Pain was adequately managed in both groups and there was no difference in morphine requirements. Median follow-up was 22 (range 12–34) months. Dysphagia, recurrence and need for redo fundoplication were not different between groups; retching was higher after open surgery (56% vs. 6%; P = 0.003). Insulin levels decreased at 24 hours, and was 54% lower (P = 0.02) after laparoscopy. Cortisol was elevated immediately postoperative, but was 42% lower (P = 0.02) after laparoscopy. Conclusions: There was no difference in the postoperative analgesia requirements and recovery. Laparoscopy decreased insulin levels to a greater extent, but caused less of a response in cortisol. Early postoperative outcome confirmed equal efficacy, but fewer children with retching after laparoscopy. This randomized blinded controlled trial of open versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication in children demonstrated no difference in the postoperative recovery. There was no difference in analgesia requirements, and early outcome was equal, but fewer children experienced retching after laparoscopy. Laparoscopy decreased insulin levels, but caused less cortisol response.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.446
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.035 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207