Effects of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy on postoperative delirium in patients with gynecological tumor surgery: an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) increases the incidence of postoperative delirium (POD) in patients with gynecological tumors undergoing radical hysterectomy. METHODS: This study included 60 patients in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy exposure group and 60 in the non-exposure group. Preoperative cognitive function, the incidence of POD and other physiological parameters were assessed on preoperative day 1 (POD-1), postoperative day 1 (POD1), postoperative day 2 (POD2), and postoperative day 3 (POD3). Additionally, preoperative olfactory function was evaluated using an olfactory detection kit on POD-1. The primary outcome was the incidence of POD within three days after surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of POD was 28.33% in the exposed group and 8.33% in the non-exposed group (P = 0.005). Compared to the non-exposed group, the exposed group had a higher rate of cognitive dysfunction (33.33% vs 13.33%; P = 0.010), and a higher rate of olfactory dysfunction (OD) (25.00% vs 10.00%; P = 0.031). A restricted cubic spline analysis revealed a non-linear relationship between olfactory test scores and Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) scores (P for overall < 0.001, P for nonlinear = 0.001). Logistic regression identified NACT, mild and moderate cognitive dysfunction, OD, and depression as independent risk factors for POD, with all factors showing significant associations (P < 0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) of OD for predicting POD was 0.783 (95%CI 0.656-0.909). CONCLUSIONS: This single-blind observational study suggests that NACT increases the incidence of POD in patients with gynecological tumors undergoing radical hysterectomy. Moreover, the results indicate that preoperative OD may reflect preoperative cognitive dysfunction, and have predictive value for the incidence of POD.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".