MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W75417616

Severe blunt renal trauma: a 7-year retrospective review from a provincial trauma centre.

2001· review· en· W75417616 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Baverstock, Richard Simons, Martin G. McLoughlin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBluntSurgeryBlunt traumaInjury Severity ScoreRenal injuryTrauma centerPopulationAbdominal traumaRetrospective cohort studyMajor traumaConservative managementPenetrating traumaInjury preventionGeneral surgeryPoison controlKidneyEmergency medicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Renal trauma is reported in 3% of trauma patients. The majority (>90%) are due to blunt mechanisms of injury. Minor renal injuries pose few management difficulties and the majority are managed expectantly. More serious injuries are potentially life threatening and have been historically managed by operative intervention with repair of the injured kidney when possible. More recently, there has been a trend towards non-operative management of all solid intra-abdominal organ injury including renal trauma. The purpose of this study was to review a 7-year experience in renal trauma at a provincial trauma centre and to define management practices along with patient and organ outcomes in severe renal injury. METHODS: The BC Trauma Registry was reviewed for all admissions from January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1998 to identify patients with renal injury. Patient charts were reviewed to determine sex, age, mechanism of injury, vitals, imaging, associated injuries, and management and outcomes. Renal injuries were graded according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Grading System. RESULTS: During the study period 16 250 consecutive trauma cases were seen at Vancouver General Hospital. Of these cases, 227 (1.4%) patients sustained renal injuries: blunt in 93.4% and penetrating in 6.6%. Among patients with blunt renal trauma, 18.3% were grade III, IV, or V injuries. In this population, nearly 80% had associated trauma and also 80% had gross hematuria. Management was conservative in 87.5% of grade III and 77.7% of grade IV; however, 90.9% of grade V injuries went immediately to the OR. Nephrectomy rates were: 12.5% (III), 16.6% (IV), and 90.9% (V) with an overall exploration rate of 7.1% for all blunt renal trauma. Blunt renal trauma patients experienced few genitourinary complications. Overall, 3 patients of 40 with grade III, IV or V injuries died due to cardiac arrest in the emergency room. CONCLUSIONS: Blunt renal trauma managed conservatively is associated with few complications in the hemodynamically stable patient. Grade V injuries still result in a nephrectomy rate of 90.9% with hemodynamic instability the indication in 100% of patients.

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)0.003
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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations102
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207