P828 Frequency and characteristics of perianal fistulas in Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perianal fistula (PF) is the most frequent manifestation of penetrating Crohn’s disease (CD), moreover it has a great significance due to impact on treatment choice and quality of life. The cumulative prevalence of perianal fistulas at the end of the first year from diagnosis is 12%, followed by 20 years to 24%. In regard to great prevalence, therapeutic significance, our aim in this study was to assess frequency, clinical characteristics and long-term outcome of PF in CD. Patients’ data were collected from database of a tertiary IBD centre from 2007 to 2017. Montreal classification was used to determine CD phenotype. Patients’ data were statistically analysed using chi-squared and Kruskal–Wallis test. Five hundred and seventeen of 1064 IBD patients were diagnosed with CD in our database. Median age at first symptoms of CD was 25 years in female and 22 years in male. Median age at diagnosis of CD was 26 years in female and 24 years in male. A total of 134 patients (25.9%) had PF during the assessed 10-year period, out of which 114 patients had PF on the last visit, as well. PFs were most frequently in colon (L2) and ileocolon (L3) disease localisation (71.2%). Simple PFs occurred in 28.6 %, complex PFs in 71.4% of patients. In complex PFs occurrence was 8.3%, 41.7% and 50% in L1, L2 and L3. Significantly more multiplex PFs (p = 0.025) was found in men. There was also a connection between CRP and PFs: multiple PFs linked with significantly higher CRP levels (p = 0.037), and the severity of the PFs based on PDAI scores showed strong association with CRP levels (p = 0.039). There was a correlation between PDAI points and smoking (p = 0.014), night bowel movements (p = 0.003) and number of seton drainage (p = 0.046). Biological therapy was administered to 64 CD patients. Number of perianal surgeries significantly decreased after starting to use biological treatment (p < 0.001). A total of 18 colon deviation and/or extirpation operations were performed. The PFs occurred most commonly in colon disease localisation. In our study, number of perianal surgeries decreased due to use of biological therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".