The Prevalence and Clinical Impact of Transition Zone Anastomosis in Hirschsprung Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hirschsprung disease (HD) is characterized by absent neuronal innervation of the distal colonic bowel wall and is surgically treated by removing the affected bowel segment via pull-through surgery (PT). Incomplete removal of the affected segment is called transition zone anastomosis (TZA). The current systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and clinical impact of TZA. Methods: Pubmed, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Sciences were searched (last search: October 2020), and studies describing histopathological examination for TZA in patients with HD were included. Data were synthesized into aggregated Event Rates (ER) of TZA using random-effects meta-analysis. The clinical impact was defined in terms of obstructive defecation problems, enterocolitis, soiling, incontinence, and the need for additional surgical procedures. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Key Results: This systematic review included 34 studies, representing 2207 patients. After excluding series composed of only patients undergoing redo PT, the prevalence was 9% (ER = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.05–0.14, p < 0.001, I2 = 86%). TZA occurred more often after operation techniques other than Duhamel (X2 = 19.21, p = <0.001). Patients with TZA often had obstructive defecation problems (62%), enterocolitis (38%), soiling (28%), and fecal incontinence (24%) in follow-up periods ranging from 6 months to 13 years. Patients with TZA more often had persistent obstructive symptoms (X2 = 7.26, p = 0.007). Conclusions and Inferences: TZA is associated with obstructive defecation problems and redo PT and is thus necessary to prevent.
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 | 0.014 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".