Short and Long‐Term Outcomes in Hirschsprung Disease: Are the Syndrome‐Associated Patients Really Doing Worse?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Given the lack of data to help caregivers in the follow-up of Hirschsprung disease (HD), this study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of isolated Hirschsprung disease (I-HD) to syndrome-associated Hirschsprung disease (SA-HD) at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with HD between January 1990 and May 2021 at our pediatric center was performed to collect data on patient characteristics, investigations, and treatments. Ninety-five patients were identified, of whom 76 were included in the study. SA-HD is defined as a syndrome known to be associated with HD or cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were comparable between groups ( P > 0.05). There were 52 patients with I-HD and 24 with SA-HD. The patients median age was 9 days at diagnosis and 1.5 month at surgery. SA-HD patients became bowel continent at a significantly older age (mean age 8.43 vs 4.94 years, P = 0.0471) and received more bowel continence medications. At 5 years, SA-HD patients requiring ≥2 medications for bowel continence represented 54.5% versus 11.1% of I-HD patients ( P = 0.009). Lastly, SA-HD patients had urinary incontinence at a significantly older age ( P = 0.0136, 5 years). CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware that SA-HD patients are more prone to bladder dysfunction and became bowel continent at an older age than I-HD patients. They need more and prolonged bowel management medications, and other important complications need to be addressed in patient care. These results should prompt a longer follow-up period for these patients, especially in SA-HD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".