Rectosigmoid intussusception presenting as rectal prolapse in a premature baby: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rectosigmoid intussusception in premature infants is a rare condition. We present a case of rectosigmoid intussusception initially presenting as rectal prolapse. A premature male baby born at 24 weeks gestation was transferred to our center at two months of age due to recurrent rectal prolapse with minimal straining, despite repeated reductions. The etiology of the prolapse was unclear. An abdominal X-ray showed bowel dilation with air-fluid levels. The gas pattern in the abdomen indicated a mid to distal bowel obstruction. An abdominal ultrasound revealed an intussusception behind the bladder, measuring 3.8 cm in cranio-caudal dimension, appearing to be in the rectum or distal sigmoid colon. The patient underwent a diagnostic laparoscopy. We found a rectosigmoid intussusception, which we reduced laparoscopically. After the laparoscopy we did a flexible sigmoidoscopy and saw that the bowel wall appeared edematous and bruised but was not compromised. There were no polyps or any other intraluminal lesions. We concluded that the recurrent prolapse was the intussusception protruding through the anus (likely originating from mesenteric lymph nodes) rather than a rectal prolapse. There were no perioperative or postoperative complications, the patient tolerated the procedure well and had an uneventful recovery. Rectosigmoid intussusception can resemble rectal prolapse and should be ruled out if prolapse recurs immediately after reduction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".