MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Features and outcomes of patients with grade IV renal injury

2008· article· en· W2068474640 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNephrectomyBluntSurgeryProspective cohort studyRenal injuryComplicationBlunt traumaEmergency departmentInjury Severity ScoreKidneyInjury preventionPoison controlInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of patients who presented with grade IV renal trauma to our urban level I trauma hospital and to further refine the absolute indications for exploration and determine the outcomes of conservative management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 77 patients with grade IV traumatic renal injuries presented to our emergency department between October 1997 and October 2006. A prospective trauma database including these patients was analysed to determine the patterns of injury, operative outcomes and complications. RESULTS: A quarter of the patients had gunshot injuries, 9% had stab injuries, and 66% had blunt traumas. In all, 36% of patients required surgical exploration to treat associated non-urological injuries. There was no or microscopic haematuria in 29% of the patients. Of the 32 patients who underwent renal exploration, 63% (20/32) underwent renorrhaphy and 37% (12/32) underwent nephrectomy. In multivariate analyses, only gunshot injury, surgery for non-urological injury, and volume of blood transfused were significantly associated with the need for renal exploration (P = 0.015, P = 0.041, and P = 0.032, respectively). The renal complication rate was higher in patients managed conservatively vs those who underwent surgical exploration, but this was not statistically significantly different (28% vs 13%, P = 0.2). Hospital stay was longer after renal exploration than after conservative management at a median of 12 days vs 7 days (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: While almost all patients with penetrating injury require renal exploration, only 20% of those with blunt trauma do. Patients with no renal injuries and/or haemodynamic instability are more likely to require exploration. Finally, the rate of complications was not statistically different according to management type (conservative vs renal exploration).

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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