Outcomes following neonatal portal vein thrombosis: A descriptive, single‐center study and review of anticoagulant therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neonatal portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is uncommon with potentially serious complications that may manifest in infancy and childhood. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of our study was to describe the short-term and long-term outcomes of neonatal PVT. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted from 2008 to 2016 of neonates diagnosed with PVT. A systematic review was also performed from 2000 to 2018 to evaluate anticoagulant therapy (ACT) in neonatal PVT. RESULTS: Forty-four premature and 30 term infants (mean gestational age 30.7 vs 39.1 weeks, respectively) had PVT. Sixty-eight involved the left portal vein, one involved only the main portal vein, and 5 involved ≥1 vein. PVT was catheter associated in 46 (62%); none of the 7 neonates tested had thrombophilia. Of 74 neonates, 19 (26%) received ACT and 55 (74%) were untreated. The mean follow-up duration was 16.6 months (SD = 17.62; range, 0-89.6); 59.5% were followed for ≥6 months. On last ultrasound examination, thrombus resolution was documented in treated (ACT; n = 19) and nontreated (n = 55) neonates: 12 (63%) versus 32 (58%) with complete resolution, 1 (5%) versus 6 (11%) partial, 0 versus 1 (2%) extension, and 6 (32%) versus 16 (29%) had nonprogressive lesions, respectively. Seventy-one (96%) had no complications. Seventy-one articles met inclusion criteria for the systematic review and 19 were retained for analysis after assessment. CONCLUSIONS: PVT resolution rate was similar to previous reports. Although a low complication rate was detected, longer follow-up is necessary to determine the need for early treatment and the precise incidence of outcomes such as portal hypertension.
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".