Operative Time as the Predominant Risk Factor for Transfusion Requirements in Nonsyndromic Craniosynostosis Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite recent advances in surgical, anesthetic, and safety protocols in the management of nonsyndromic craniosynostosis (NSC), significant rates of intraoperative blood loss continue to be reported by multiple centers. The purpose of the current study was to examine our center's experience with the surgical correction of NSC in an effort to determine independent risk factors of transfusion requirements. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with NSC undergoing surgical correction at the Montreal Children's Hospital was carried out. Baseline characteristics and perioperative complications were compared between patients receiving and not receiving transfusions and between those receiving a transfusion in excess or <25 cc/kg. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine independent predictors of transfusion requirements. RESULTS: = 0.004; odds ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.23-3.07) transfusions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest increasing operative time as the predominant risk factor for intraoperative transfusion requirements. We encourage craniofacial surgeons to consider techniques to streamline the delivery of their selected procedure, in an effort to reduce operative time while minimizing the need for transfusion.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".