MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281626855 · doi:10.14740/jocmr4718

Risk Factors, Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Treatment Outcomes of Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Five-Year Hospital-Based Study From Qatar

2022· article· en· W4281626855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fahmi Yousef Khan, Elmukhtar Habas, Theeb Osama Sulaiman, Omnia Hamid, Ahmed Abdalhadi, Ahmad Taha Khalaf, Mohammed S. Afana, Mohamed Yousif Ali, Yahia Zakaria Baniamer, Wael Kanjo, Bassam Muthanna, Raza Ali Akbar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePortal vein thrombosisLow molecular weight heparinWarfarinRivaroxabanCirrhosisThrombosisDeep veinSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineObservational studyAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is a lack of robust epidemiological information on portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in Qatar. This study aimed to describe the risk factors, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment outcomes of PVT in patients with and without liver cirrhosis admitted to Hamad General Hospital. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted at Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar. Consecutive patients with PVT between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 were included in this study. Results: We included 363 cases representing 0.05% of all inpatients admitted to our hospital during the study period. Their mean age was 47.79 ± 14.48 years. There were 258 (71.1%) males and 105 (28.9%) females. Abdominal pain was the most common presenting symptom (160 (44.1%)), while splenomegaly was the most common presenting sign (158 (43.5%)). Liver cirrhosis was the most frequent risk factor for PVT (147 (40.5%)), while no risk factors were identified in 49 (13.5%) patients. Anticoagulant therapy was given to 171/207 (82.6%) patients with acute PVT and 19/156 (12.2%) patients with chronic PVT. The options used for anticoagulation treatment were: low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin alone, LMWH/unfractionated heparin followed by warfarin, and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban). Out of the 262 patients in whom PVT recanalization was assessed, 43.8% of the cases had recanalization after anticoagulation treatment, while 12.6% of them had spontaneous recanalization without such therapy. A comparison between different anticoagulants used in this study showed no significant difference in the effectiveness of the three regimens used. The 30-day mortality was recorded for 71 patients (19.5%). The major risk factors for 30-day mortality were: age over 45 years, male sex, hepatic failure, malignancies, and bilirubin > 34 µmol/L. Conclusion: PVT is a rare clinical entity in Qatar with liver cirrhosis being the most common risk factor. Early administration of anticoagulation therapy is associated with a significant recanalization, while age > 45 years, male sex, hepatic failure, malignancies, and bilirubin > 34 µmol/L are independent risk factors for 30-day mortality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207