European Paediatric Surgeons' Association Consensus Statement on the Management of Giant Omphalocele
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Giant omphalocele management had not reached a consensus from the pediatric surgical perspective regarding conservative treatments, surgical approaches, and clinical outcomes. This topic was therefore selected for the 2023 Consensus Session of the European Paediatric Surgeons' Association (EUPSA). Literature review was conducted by seven EUPSA members, guided by a set of predefined areas relating to the management of giant omphalocele: (1) conservative management, (2) surgical management, and (3) outcomes. Members were assigned to specific topics, with discrepancies resolved through structured group discussion and further literature review. Consensus was reached through unanimous agreement among the contributing members. Each topic was presented with available evidence to congress participants. Comments from participants were accounted to formulate the final consensus statement. Giant omphalocele is appropriately defined as viscero-abdominal disproportion preventing primary closure. Regarding (1) conservative management, the “paint and wait” approach is recommended when anatomical constraints or high surgical risk preclude primary closure. Common painting agents include povidone-iodine and silver sulfadiazine, with Manuka honey gaining interest, though consensus on dosing, duration, and complications remains unclear. With regards to (2) surgical management, early closure favors biological meshes, while delayed closure appears most effective using native tissues. High mortality in delayed patch closure likely reflects a population with the most severe defects. Finally, (3) outcomes highlights key prognostic factors including chromosomal abnormalities, cardiac defects, and low birth weight, which may guide counseling, screening, and treatment. Limited data on ruptured omphalocele indicates towards increased mortality, necessitating prompt intervention. Complications following management are relatively rare and typically intervention-related, underscoring the need for long-term, multidisciplinary follow-up. A consensus statement on the management of giant omphalocele was developed based on current evidence and peer practice, though imitations relating to a scarcity of high-level evidence and significant heterogeneity across studies should be acknowledged. Despite these constraints, this consensus statement provides evidence-based guidance to support pediatric surgeons in informed decision-making for this pathology.
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 | 0.051 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".