{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016245487364620937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004512635379061372, 'mean_word_length': 5.640718562874252, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A critical reappraisal of a mandatory exploration policy for penetrating wounds of the neck.

Over-all, the results of this review suggest that mandatory exploration for penetrating wounds of the neck may be safely supplanted by selective management. The basis for this conclusion includes: 1, most neck wounds were not associated with significant injury; 2, routine exploration did not obviate the possibility of missed injuries; 3, negative findings at exploration were associated with a number of complications; 4, hospital stay for patients with negative neck exploration results was similar to those with positive exploration findings, and 5, it appears that selective management should not increase the need for special diagnostic studies. Patients with clearly positive clinical findings indicating visceral neck injury should undergo operative exploration. Those with a negative clinical examination should be closely observed. Contrast roentgenographic and other special studies should be reserved for those with equivocal clinical findings or who have a change in clinical status under observation.