HIV Infection: Its Impact on Patients with Appendicitis in Botswana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the presentation, management, and outcome of HIV-positive patients with appendicitis to those of HIV-negative patients with appendicitis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The literature is limited regarding the impact of HIV infection on patients with appendicitis. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with appendicitis and known HIV status admitted to Princess Marina Hospital, Gaborone, Botswana, aged 13 years and greater was performed from January 2013 to December 2015. Data on patient demographics, presentation, laboratory findings, management, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 295 patients with appendicitis and known HIV status were identified, of which 119 (40.3%) were HIV positive. The median [IQR] ages for HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients were 34 [29-42] and 26 [20-33] years, respectively. The male-to-female ratio for the same two groups was 0.8:1 and 1.4:1, respectively. Presenting symptoms, signs, and white blood cell count were similar in both groups. HIV-positive patients had significantly higher overall (4.2 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.010) and postoperative (4.4 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.024) mortality rates. There was no significant difference in the total complication rate between HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients (13.2 vs. 7.9%, p = 0.192). Compared to HIV-positive patients with a CD4 count ≥200, patients with a CD4 count <200 have a significantly higher postoperative mortality rate (17.6 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.023) and a trend toward a higher total postoperative complication rate (31.3 vs. 10.8%, p = 0.054). CONCLUSION: Within our setting, HIV infection, particularly with a CD4 <200, was correlated with significantly higher mortality in patients with acute appendicitis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".