MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774499981 · doi:10.1089/sur.2017.147

Early Rescue from Acute Severe <i>Clostridium Difficile</i> : A Novel Treatment Strategy

2017· article· en· W2774499981 on OpenAlexaff
Biniam Kidane, Kalvin Lung, Greig McCreery, Chadia El-Khatib, Michael Ott, Roberto Hernandez‐Alejandro, Chris Vinden, Daryl Gray, Neil Parry, Kenneth Leslie, Tina Mele

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Infections · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClostridium difficileAcute kidney injuryColectomyRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care unitCohortSurgeryEmergency medicineInternal medicineDiseaseUlcerative colitisAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) can lead to significant impediments to effective treatment. We developed a novel treatment protocol utilizing bedside gastrointestinal lavage (GIL) for the management of patients with severe, complicated CDI. We describe the development and early outcomes of non-operative bedside GIL in hospitalized patients with severe, complicated CDI following the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long Term Study (IDEAL) framework at the Idea stage. We compared our results with those of a cohort of patients managed with colectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with severe, complicated CDI who failed conventional medical therapy and were referred for surgical consultation at two academic tertiary-care hospitals between January 2009 and January 2015. After surgical assessment, the attending surgeon decided to proceed either with bedside GIL or directly to colectomy. Bedside GIL involved nasojejunal tube insertion followed by flushing with 8 L of polyethylene glycol 3350/electrolyte solution over 48 h. Both patient groups received standard medical treatment with vancomycin 500 mg q 6 h enterally and metronidazole 500 mg intravenously three times daily for 14 d. The main outcomes of interest were the incidence of colectomy, complications, and mortality rate. RESULTS: Nineteen and seventeen patients underwent GIL and direct colectomy, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, disease severity, need for intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, serum lactate concentration, or proportion presenting with hypotension, acute kidney injury, or a white blood cell count >16,000/mcL or <4,000/mcL (p > 0.1). The in-hospital mortality rate was 26% (5/19) and 41% (7/17) for the GIL and colectomy groups, respectively (p = 0.35). Only one patient in the GIL group failed the protocol, requiring colectomy. There were no significant differences in complications in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside GIL appeared to be safe for the treatment of patients with severe, complicated CDI who had failed conventional medical therapy. It did not appear to increase the risk of morbidity or death compared with the traditional strategy of proceeding directly to colectomy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurgical InfectionsSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207