Impact of Deferred Treatment of Blunt Diaphragmatic Rupture: A 15-Year Experience in Six Trauma Centers in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to show that blunt diaphragmatic rupture does not require immediate emergency operation in the absence of other indications. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with blunt diaphragmatic rupture admitted within 24 hours of injury to one of six university trauma centers providing trauma care for the province of Quebec from April 1, 1984, to March 31, 1999. Multivariate analysis of demographic profiles, severity indices, indications for operation, and preoperative delays was performed. RESULTS: There were 160 patients (91 men and 69 women) with blunt diaphragmatic rupture. Mean age was 40.1 +/- 16.2 years. Mean Injury Severity Score was 26.9 +/- 11.5 and mortality was 14.4%. Patients undergoing emergency surgery for indications other than diaphragmatic rupture had a significantly higher Injury Severity Score than those undergoing surgery for repair of diaphragmatic rupture alone (34.7 +/- 10.7 vs. 22.0 +/- 9.0, p < 0.001). In patients undergoing surgery for diaphragmatic rupture alone, delay before repair of the diaphragmatic hernia did not lead to an increased mortality compared with patients undergoing immediate surgery (3.4% vs. 5.0%, p = NS). CONCLUSION: Blunt diaphragmatic rupture in the absence of other surgical injuries carries low mortality. Operative repair of diaphragmatic rupture can be deferred without appreciable increased mortality if no other indication mandates immediate surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".