MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210927569 · doi:10.1136/wjps-2021-000354

Postoperative complications of colectomy and J-pouch with ileostomy versus without ileostomy in children with inflammatory bowel diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4210927569 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Pediatric Surgery · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStoma care and complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicinePouchitisIleostomyProctocolectomyPouchAnastomosisSurgeryUlcerative colitisMeta-analysisColectomyOdds ratioSystematic reviewInternal medicineGeneral surgeryMEDLINEDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The efficacy of performing a restorative proctocolectomy and J-pouch ileoanal anastomosis without diverting ileostomy in children with inflammatory bowel disease has been a longstanding debate. A systematic review and meta-analysis is presented comparing the occurrence of postoperative complications in children who underwent either the pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) with ileostomy (diverted) versus the undiverted procedure. Methods Records were sourced from CINAHL, CENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. Studies followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and compared postoperative complications in pediatric patients diagnosed with inflammatory diseases aged less than 18 years who underwent J-pouch with ileostomy versus without ileostomy. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative leaks, and the secondary outcomes were presence of postoperative small bowel obstruction (SBO), pouchitis, stricture and fistula complications. A random-effects meta-analysis was used. Results Twenty-three observational studies in the systematic review were included with 658 patients (83% diverted, 17% undiverted). Pooled estimates showed no difference in occurrence of leaks in children who underwent J-pouch/IPAA with ileostomy versus without (odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.64, I 2 =16%). There was no difference in the occurrence of SBO, pouchitis or strictures in children who underwent J-pouch/IPAA with ileostomy versus without (SBO: OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.52 to 9.92, I 2 =0%, pouchitis: OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.95 to 3.24, I 2 =0%, strictures: OR 2.72, 95% CI 0.44 to 16.69, I 2 =66%). Conclusion The meta-analysis did not find differences in the occurrence of complications in pediatric patients who underwent the IPAA with ileostomy procedure versus without ileostomy.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.268 · 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