MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gastric ultrasound to guide anesthetic management in elective surgical patients non-compliant with fasting instructions: a retrospective cohort study

2018· article· en· W2903154785 on OpenAlex
Peter Van de Putte, Jonathan van Hoonacker, Anahi Perlas

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerva Anestesiologica · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyPerioperativePreoperative fastingUltrasoundMcNemar's testAnesthesiologyIncidence (geometry)SurgeryAnesthesiaRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Perioperative aspiration leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Standard fasting periods are used to ensure an empty stomach in patients. Anesthesiologists are frequently confronted with cases of dubious adherence to these guidelines. Point-of-care gastric ultrasound is a diagnostic tool that offers information on the type and volume of gastric contents. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a departmental database containing clinical and sonographic information on elective surgical patients who had been non-compliant to the fasting guidelines. Primary outcome was the incidence of changes in aspiration risk stratification and anesthetic management when a point-of-care gastric ultrasound examination was added to a standard history-based clinical assessment. Secondary outcomes included type of changes (timing of the surgical procedure or change in anesthetic technique) and the incidence of aspiration. Differences in the management plan (history-based versus gastric ultrasound) were tested with McNemar-Bowker's Exact Test of symmetry. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients met the inclusion criteria. Aspiration risk assessment and anesthetic management changed in 24 cases (64.9%) following gastric ultrasound. Additionally, there was a non-significant difference in the distribution of the pre- and post-test changes in timing (delay, cancel, proceed) (P=0.074) with a trend towards a lower number of surgical cancellations and a higher number of proceeds. No aspirations were documented. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that gastric ultrasound may be a useful diagnostic addition to standard patient assessment in cases of non-compliance to fasting guidelines. It allows to personalize aspiration risk assessment and to tailor anesthetic management to the individual patient.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.249 · 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