Routine Postoperative Admission to the Intensive Care Unit Following Repair of Nonsyndromic Craniosynostosis: Is it Necessary?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cranial vault surgery for craniosynostosis is generally managed postoperatively in the intensive care unit (ICU). The purpose of the present study was to examine our center's experience with the postoperative management of otherwise healthy patients with nonsyndromic craniosynostosis (NSC) without routine ICU admission. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with NSC operated using a variety of vault reshaping techniques in our pediatric center between 2009 and 2017 was carried out. Patients with documented preexisting comorbidities that would have required admission to the ICU regardless of the surgical intervention were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were included in the study. Postoperatively, 100 patients (98%) were admitted as planned to a general surgical ward following observation in the recovery room. Two patients (2%) required ICU admission due to adverse intraoperative events. There were no patients who required transfer to the ICU from the recovery area or surgical ward. Within the surgical ward cohort, 6 patients (6%) had minor postoperative complications that were readily managed on the surgical floor. Postoperative anemia requiring transfusion was the most common complication. CONCLUSION: The results from this study suggest that otherwise healthy patients with NSC undergoing cranial vault surgery can potentially be safely managed without routine admission to the ICU postoperatively. Key elements are proper preoperative screening, access to ICU should an adverse intraoperative event occur and necessary postoperative surgical care. The authors hope that this experience will encourage other craniofacial surgeons to reconsider the dogma of routine ICU admission for this patient population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".