Risk Factors of Cholelithiasis Unrelated to Hematological Disorders in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Cholecystectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric cholelithiasis unrelated to hematological disorders is an increasing disease. We analyzed our experience in the surgical treatment of these cases to evaluate risk factors, clinical presentation, intervention and follow-up. METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2016, we retrospectively recorded all data (hematological study, familiarity, use of lithogenic drugs and parenteral nutrition) of cholecystectomies for cholelithiasis not related to hematological diseases. The body mass index (BMI) was calculated (obesity if > 25), medical treatment, surgery and follow-up were evaluated. All patients underwent ultrasound for diagnosis and major biliary tract assessment prior to surgery. All patients had a 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: in eight cases. Regarding the clinical presentation, 14 had acute pain in the right upper quadrant, 5 had cholecystitis and 5 had non-specific abdominal pain. The medical treatment lasted 6 months in all, except for five (three operated after 2 months and two after 12 months). Preoperative ultrasound did not show stones in the biliary tract. MRI was performed in three cases for suspected malformation of the biliary tract (negative). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in all cases: mean intervention time was 95 min. A case of postcolecystectomy syndrome was found. At follow-up, all were asymptomatic, except two (recurrent abdominal pain). CONCLUSION: Main predisposing factors are familiarity and obesity. Preoperative ultrasound in our series replaced the intraoperative study of the biliary tract. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the gold standard.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".