Use of Tissue Plasminogen Activator in Abdominal Abscesses in Children—A Single-Center Randomized Control Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To establish the efficacy of once-per-day intracavitary tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) in the treatment of pediatric intra-abdominal abscesses. Methods: A single-center prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of the use of intracavitary tPA in abdominal abscesses in children. Patients were randomized to either tPA-treatment or saline-treatment groups. Primary outcome was drainage catheter dwell (hours). Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, times to discharge, clinical and sonographic resolution, and adverse events (AEs). Results: Twenty-eight children were randomized to either group (n = 14 each). Demographics between groups were not significantly different (age P = .28; weight P = .40; gender P = .44). There were significantly more abscesses in the tPA-treated group ( P = .03). Abscesses were secondary to perforated appendicitis (n = 25) or postappendectomy (n = 3). Thirty-four abscesses were drained, 4 aspirated, 3 neither drained/aspirated. There was no significant difference in number of drains ( P = .14), drain size ( P = .19), primary outcome ( P = .077), or secondary outcomes found. No procedural or intervention drug-related AEs occurred. No patient in the saline-treated group required to be switched/treated with tPA. Conclusion: No significant difference in the length of catheter dwell time, procedure time to discharge, or time to resolution was found. Intracavitary tPA was not associated with morbidity or mortality. The results neither support nor negate routine use of tPA in the drainage of intra-abdominal abscess in children. It is possible that a multicentre study with a larger number of patients may answer this question more definitively.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".