MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386989219 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxad055.087

87 Infant Malrotation with Midgut Volvulus Presenting in the Paediatric Emergency Department or the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Review for a Quality Improvement Initiative

2023· review· en· W4386989219 on OpenAlexaff
Evelyne D Trottier, Ludovik Filion, Sarah Emmanuelle Blondin, Mona Beaunoyer, Marie Claude Miron, Michael Assaad

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaGovernment of ManitobaNova Scotia Department of AgricultureGovernment of New BrunswickNova Scotia HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaManitoba HealthUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)Neonatal intensive care unitEmergency departmentPediatricsRetrospective cohort studyVomitingIntensive care unitSurgeryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In neonates, bilious vomiting is considered malrotation with midgut volvulus (MV) until proven otherwise, given its associated high morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis is time-critical, requiring prompt identification to avoid complications. Many of these patients are described as clinically well at time of presentation, possibly delaying definitive management. Objectives This study was a retrospective quality initiative aimed to evaluate the clinical presentation of infants and children with MV in a single paediatric tertiary care centre emergency department (ED) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The study also aimed to identify delays in the management pathway. Design/Methods Patients with a final diagnosis of MV presenting to the ED/NICU were identified between January 2015 and May 2022. Patient demographics, signs and symptoms at presentation, initial laboratory studies, imaging, and surgical findings were recorded. The following time points were recorded: (1) first medical evaluation, (2) radiologic investigations (abdominal X-ray [AXR], ultrasound [US], upper gastrointestinal radiography [UGI]), (3) consultation with surgical team, and (4) time to surgery. Results During the study period, 29 paediatric patients presented a diagnosis of MV (ED: 21, NICU: 8). The median age at presentation was 7 days (3-13.5), with 27/29 (93%) being less than 3 months. From them, 21 patients (72%) were male. Bilious green (17/26) and/or yellow (13/26) vomiting was the most frequent presentation in 26/26 (100%), the three other patients had missing data. Five patients (17%) had a pH < 7.30 (with base deficit < -5) and seven (24%) patients had a glucose value > 7 mmol/L. Abdominal radiograph was performed in 17/29 (59%) patients. All (100%) had ultrasound (US) which was diagnostic in 24/29 (83%) cases. Six upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) were performed, being diagnostic in all cases (100%). The Ladd’s procedure was the standard treatment for every patient (100%). Median time between arrival and US was 151 minutes (71 – 243), UGI was 347 min (246 – 800) and surgery was 299 minutes (204-371). In the NICU specifically, six cases were referrals, with the median time between the first documented bilious vomit and the call from the referral centre being 660 minutes (335-1104). Of the 29 cases, 27 (93%) survived and from them, one suffered a short bowel complication. Conclusion Bilious (green/yellow) vomiting is a reliable clinical sign of MV in infants, being always aware that yellow may be bile. Ultrasound is a rapid test with more than 80% diagnostic accuracy. Delay for definitive surgery was considered slightly high. This quality initiative will help develop a clinical practice guideline and algorithm to reduce delays for infants presenting with MV.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207