MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170349282 · doi:10.1148/radiol.2411050966

Percutaneous Thoracic Drainage in Neonates: Catheter Drainage versus Treatment with Aspiration Alone

2006· article· en· W2170349282 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Margau, João Amaral, Peter Chait, Justine V. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryPneumothoraxPercutaneousCatheterDrainageThoracentesisGestational ageExact testPleural effusionPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare thoracic drainage in neonates by using catheter and aspiration techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Approval was obtained from the institutional research ethics board; informed consent from parents was waived. Retrospective review of 21 neonates (19 boys, two girls; mean gestational age, 39.3 weeks) who underwent percutaneous thoracic drainage during a 9-year period was performed. Data such as indication for drainage, type of drainage, age and weight at birth, corrected age and weight at the time of drainage, use of mechanical ventilation at the time of drainage, and outcomes were collected. Drainage was considered successful if the collection was treated without additional surgical or radiologic intervention. Fisher exact test and two-tailed unpaired student t test with a confidence level of 95% (unequal variances assumed) were used to compare neonates treated with a catheter and those treated with aspiration. RESULTS: Image-guided therapy was used to treat pleural effusion (29%, n = 6), chylothorax (24%, n = 5), empyema (19%, n = 4), pneumothorax (14%, n = 3), mediastinal seroma (10%, n = 3), and congenital cystic adenomatoid malformation (5%, n = 1). Sixteen (76%) infants were treated with catheter placement, with a success rate of 81% (13 of 16). Five (24%) infants were treated with simple aspiration with no success. The difference in success rates was significant (P = .003). There was no significant difference between the catheter placement and aspiration groups in terms of average age, average weight, and percentage dependent on mechanical ventilation. One complication (cellulitis) was directly related to catheter drainage. In cases where treatment was successful, the mean length of the chest tube placement was 13.5 days, and there were no deaths at follow-up. In cases where treatment failed, the long-term mortality rate was 50% (four of eight). CONCLUSION: Image-guided percutaneous thoracic drainage success rates are improved if drainage catheters are placed rather than if aspiration alone is performed.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207