Multicenter Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Systemic Propranolol in the Treatment of Airway Hemangiomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of systemic propranolol in airway infantile hemangioma (AIH) treatment. DESIGN: Case series with chart review. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with AIH treated with propranolol between 2009 and 2012 with at least a 1-year follow-up. OUTCOMES: Presenting age, treating institution, syndrome presence, presenting AIH stage, endoscopy status, propranolol initiation location/dose/duration, time to stridor resolution, adjunctive medical and surgical therapy, and treatment-associated complications. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. Average age of diagnosis was 2.3 months (range, 1-5 months). The AIHs were stage 1 in 7 of 27 (26%), stage 2 in 12 of 27 (44%), and stage 3 in 8 of 27 (30%). Propranolol initiation was inpatient in 25 of 27 (93%) and outpatient in 2 of 27 (7%). Propranolol dose was maintained at 2 mg/kg/d in all patients for a minimum of 7 months (range, 7-34 months; median, 15 months). Stridor was eliminated within 24 hours or less of propranolol initiation in 23 of 27 (85%). At diagnosis, staging and propranolol initiation in 11 of 27 (41%) were managed with propranolol alone; the remaining 16 of 27 (59%) also had a steroid injection. The use of adjuvant therapy at the time of propranolol initiation and the size of the AIH were not statistically correlated. Twelve patients had additional treatments after the initiation of propranolol due to recurrence of respiratory symptoms, 1 of 27 (4%) of whom was considered a nonresponder. No complications related to propranolol use were noted. CONCLUSIONS: This multisite study of AIH treatment with propranolol demonstrates similar effectiveness to surgical treatment modalities. Propranolol therapy for AIH had no complications, had potentially lower resource utilization, and should be considered a first-line AIH treatment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| 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".