MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391883650 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8603

Examining the utility of routine perioperative hemoglobin monitoring in patients undergoing radical nephrectomy

2024· article· en· W4391883650 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Charlie Gillis, Ali Sherazi, Ricardo Rendon, G. Ilie, Ross Mason

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional HospitalDalhousie University
FundersAstellas PharmaSanofiAstraZenecaAmgen
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeInterquartile rangeNephrectomyBlood transfusionLogistic regressionSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyHemoglobinAnesthesiaInternal medicineKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing radical nephrectomy (RN) are often admitted with protocolized bloodwork for several days following their operation, yet the clinical value of serial hemoglobin (Hgb) measurements has not been established. This can lead to unnecessary costs and can prolong patient stay, despite the absence of an intervention based on these lab values. This study sought to examine perioperative Hgb values and identify those patients at high risk of bleeding requiring intervention, as well as those patients who are unlikely to require further monitoring. METHODS: Patient and perioperative factors were retrospectively examined for a cohort of 259 radical nephrectomy patients from 2015-2021 in Atlantic Canada. Postoperative Hgb values and transfusion rates were recorded. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with requiring a blood transfusion. RESULTS: Overall, 31 (12%) patients required a blood transfusion in the postoperative period. Median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 150 (interquartile range [IQR] 100-300) ml, with a median Hgb change of 15 (IQR 9-22) g/L from preoperative to postoperative day 1 (POD1). In patients with a Hgb loss of ≤15 g/L (n=131), transfusion was only required in four patients (3.1%). Among those with a POD1 Hgb >100 g/L (n=199), only four (2%) required transfusion. These patients were identified as having complications based on hemodynamic instability. On multivariate regression analysis, factors found to be associated with higher transfusion risk were age and intraoperative EBL, while higher preoperative Hgb was found to be associated with a lower transfusion risk. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who have a reassuring POD1 Hgb value, with a drop of <15 g/L or an absolute value of >100 g/L, consideration can be made towards discontinuing routine Hgb testing in the absence of a clinical indication. Age, blood loss, and preoperative Hgb are factors that may affect a patient's overall risk of transfusion.

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)0.004
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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207