Therapeutic applications of octreotide in pediatric patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: We report our experience with the use of octreotide as primary or adjunctive therapy in children with various gastrointestinal disorders. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A pharmacy database identified patients who received octreotide for gastrointestinal diseases. Indications for octreotide use, dosing, effectiveness, and adverse events were evaluated by chart review. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients (12 males), aged 1 month to 13 years, were evaluated. Eleven received octreotide for massive gastrointestinal bleeding caused by portal hypertension-induced lesions (n=7), typhlitis (1), Meckel's diverticulum (1), and indefinite source (2). Blood transfusion requirements were reduced from 23 ± 9 mL/kg (mean ± SD) to 8 ± 15 mL/kg (P<0.01). Four patients with pancreatic pseudocyst and/or ascites received octreotide over 14.0 ± 5.7 days in 2 patients. In 3 children, pancreatic pseudocyst resolved in 12 ± 2 days and pancreatic ascites resolved in 7 days in 2. Three patients with chylothorax received octreotide for 14 ± 7 days with complete resolution in each. Two infants with chronic diarrhea received octreotide over 11 ± 4.2 months. Stool output decreased from 85 ± 21 mL/kg/day to 28 ± 18 mL/kg/day, 3 months after initiation of octreotide. The child with dumping syndrome responded to octreotide in a week. Adverse events developed in 4 patients: Q-T interval prolongation and ventricular fibrillation, hyperglycemia, growth hormone deficiency, and hypertension. CONCLUSION: Octreotide provides a valuable addition to the therapeutic armamentum of the pediatric gastroenterologist for a wide variety of disorders. Serious adverse events may occur and patients must be closely monitored.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".