Incidence of bleeding in children undergoing circumcision with ketorolac administration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Circumcision is the most common surgical procedure performed by pediatric urologists. Ketorolac has been shown to have an efficacy similar to morphine in multimodal analgesic regimens without the commonly associated adverse effects. Concerns with perioperative bleeding limit the use of ketorolac as an adjunct for pain control in surgical patients. As such, we sought to evaluate our institutional outcomes with respect to ketorolac and postoperative bleeding. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all pediatric patients undergoing circumcision from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015 at the Alberta Children's Hospital. Demographics, perioperative analgesic regimens, and return to emergency department or clinic for bleeding were gathered through chart review. RESULTS: A total of 475 patients undergoing circumcisions were studied, including 150 (32%) who received perioperative ketorolac and 325 (68%) who received standard analgesia. Patients receiving ketorolac were more likely to return to the emergency department or clinic for bleeding (ketorolac group 19/150 [13%], non-ketorolac group 16/325 [5.0%]; p=0.005). Patients receiving ketorolac were more likely to have postoperative sanguineous drainage (ketorolac group 96/150 [64%], non-ketorolac group 150/325 [46%]; p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of patients requiring postoperative admission or further medical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although a promising analgesic, ketorolac requires additional investigation for safe usage in circumcisions due to possible increased risk of bleeding.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".