MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084537249 · doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000002936

The management of occult hemothorax in adults with thoracic trauma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3084537249 on OpenAlexaff
Richard W. D. Gilbert, Adam M. Fontebasso, Lily Park, Alexandre Tran, Jacinthe Lampron

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma Management and Diagnosis
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemothoraxOccultThoracostomyPneumothoraxMechanical ventilationSurgeryMeta-analysisConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hemothorax is a common sequelae following thoracic trauma and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Current guidelines recommend all traumatic hemothoraces be considered for drainage with tube thoracostomy (TT), regardless of size. With increasing use of computed tomography, smaller hemothoraces not seen on x-ray (defined as an occult hemothorax) are frequently detected. METHODS: This systematic review was performed to gather data on patients with occult hemothorax managed with TT or without TT (termed expectant management [EM]). MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception to October 2019 were searched for relevant articles. The primary outcome was rates of failure of expectant (conservative) management. Secondary outcomes of interest included predictors of TT insertion, predictors of failure of EM, and morbidity and mortality in patients with occult hemothorax. RESULTS: We screened 1,329 abstracts from which 6 articles reporting 1,405 patients with occult hemothorax were included. Of these patients, 601 (43.68%) were managed initially with TT, and 802 (56.32%) were managed expectantly. Of the 802 patients managed expectantly, 212 failed conservative management and underwent TT insertion (23.1% pooled failure rate estimate [95% confidence interval, 17.1-29.1%]). The presence of concomitant pneumothorax predicted upfront TT insertion. Of the patients who failed EM, the need for mechanical ventilation and the presence of a large hemothorax predicted failure. Mortality was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment of occult hemothorax fails in 23.1% of patients. The presence of hemothorax greater than 300 mL and the need for mechanical ventilation predicted failure of conservative treatment and the need for TT. There was no difference in mortality between EM and TT cohorts. These data suggest that it may be possible to safely observe patients with occult hemothoraces less than 300 mL (1.5 cm pleural stripe) secondary to blunt trauma without upfront TT insertion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicTrauma Management and DiagnosisFrench-language works237,207