Search

Neural cell adhesion molecules like close homolog of L1 protein (CHL1) and neuronal glia related cell adhesion molecule (NrCAM) play an important role in development and regeneration of the central nervous system. However, they are also associated with cancerogenesis and progression in adult malignancies, thus gain increasing importance in cancer research. We therefore studied the expression of CHL1 and NrCAM according to the course of disease in children with neuroblastoma.

Introduction:  Research on esophageal atresia (EA) has been heavily published over the past decades. Herein, we aimed to study the quantity and quality as well as key topics in EA research with regards to global collaborations among countries and authors.Materials and Methods:  Publications on EA from 1945 to 2018 were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database. Productivity (quantity) was assessed by the number of publications. Quality was estimated from the number of citations, citation rate per item and year, h-index, and impact index. Collaborative networks were evaluated using VOSviewer. All measures were analyzed for countries, authors, and journals. The 10 most cited original articles between 1969 and 2018 in 5-year intervals (n = 100) were manually screened to assess the key points of EA research.Results:  A total of 2,170 publications from 85 countries published in 388 journals were identified yielding 26,755 citations, both significantly increasing over time (p < 0.001). The most productive countries and authors also accounted for high-quality publications and benefited from an active global network. The most productive journals derived from the field of pediatric surgery but accounted only for one-third of EA papers. The best cited journals were unspecific for pediatric surgery. Long-term outcome remained the most important topic in EA research, followed by surgical techniques, epidemiology, associated anomalies, perioperative complications, and postnatal management. In contrast, basic science was underrepresented.Conclusion:  Over the past seven decades, EA publications increased tremendously. Productiveness and quality benefited from global networking. Long-term outcome remains the key interest of EA research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has led to notable advancements across multiple sectors, including medicine. Yet, their effect in pediatric surgery remains largely unexplored. This study aims to assess the ability of the AI models ChatGPT-4 and Microsoft Copilot to propose diagnostic procedures, primary and differential diagnoses, as well as answer clinical questions using complex clinical case vignettes of classic pediatric surgical diseases., Methods: We conducted the study in April 2024. We evaluated the performance of LLMs using 13 complex clinical case vignettes of pediatric surgical diseases and compared responses to a human cohort of experienced pediatric surgeons. Additionally, pediatric surgeons rated the diagnostic recommendations of LLMs for completeness and accuracy. To determine differences in performance we performed statistical analyses., Results: ChatGPT-4 achieved a higher test score (52.1%) compared to Copilot (47.9%), but less than pediatric surgeons (68.8%). Overall differences in performance between ChatGPT-4, Copilot, and pediatric surgeons were found to be statistically significant (p <0.01). ChatGPT-4 demonstrated a superior performance in generating differential diagnoses compared to Copilot (p<0.05). No statistically significant differences were found between the AI models regarding suggestions for diagnostics and primary diagnosis. Overall, recommendations of LLMs were rated as average by pediatric surgeons., Conclusion: This study reveals significant limitations in the performance of AI models in pediatric surgery. Although LLMs exhibit potential across various areas, their reliability and accuracy in handling clinical decision-making tasks is limited. Further research is needed to improve AI capabilities and establish its usefulness in the clinical setting., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)