PD25-10 RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT IN ENDOSCOPIC BLADDER CANCER SURGERY IS ASSOCIATED WITH INADEQUATE PATHOLOGY SPECIMENS AND PROLONGED TIME TO CYSTECTOMY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyBladder Cancer: Detection and Screening II1 Apr 2015PD25-10 RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT IN ENDOSCOPIC BLADDER CANCER SURGERY IS ASSOCIATED WITH INADEQUATE PATHOLOGY SPECIMENS AND PROLONGED TIME TO CYSTECTOMY Derek Bos, Christopher Allard, Shawn Dason, Vladimir Ruzhynsky, Anil Kapoor, and Bobby Shayegan Derek BosDerek Bos More articles by this author , Christopher AllardChristopher Allard More articles by this author , Shawn DasonShawn Dason More articles by this author , Vladimir RuzhynskyVladimir Ruzhynsky More articles by this author , Anil KapoorAnil Kapoor More articles by this author , and Bobby ShayeganBobby Shayegan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1659AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) specimens lacking detrusor muscle are associated with clinical upstaging and the need for additional procedures which may delay curative treatment. We evaluated whether resident involvement in TURBTs is associated with adequacy of pathology specimens and time to cystectomy at a single academic centre in Ontario, Canada. METHODS We identified all TURBTs performed at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton from November 2011 to June 2014. Charts were reviewed to determine baseline characteristics, resident involvement, and pathologic findings including presence of detrusor muscle. Logistic regression was used to assess associations between resident involvement and adequacy of tumor specimens. Among patients who underwent cystectomy, we assessed the time to cystectomy from initial high risk TURBT (high grade, ≥T1, or CIS), excluding patients with subsequent low risk TURBTs, BCG, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Associations between resident involvement with pathologic outcomes and time to cystectomy were determined with Chi−square and log rank tests, respectively. RESULTS A total 664 TURBTs were performed on 471 patients during the study period. Patient and tumor characteristics were comparable for TURBTs performed by attendings and residents. Attendings were more likely to obtain muscle in specimens for all TURBTs (OR1.68 [95%CI 1.09, 2.59], p=0.018) and for the subset of 275 high risk TURBTs (OR1.99 [95%CI 1.11, 3.55], p=0.019). Senior residents (PGY3−5) had higher odds of muscle in all (OR1.91 [95%CI 1.12, 3.25], p=0.017) and high risk (OR2.9 [95%CI 1.43, 5.9], p=0.003) specimens compared with juniors. In multivariate analysis adjusting for covariates patient age, sex, and tumor size, resident involvement was associated with inadequate tumor specimens among all patients (p=0.032) and only high risk tumors (p=0.049). Resident involvement was associated with a non-significant increased need for repeat TURBT. The median time from initial high risk TURBT to cystectomy was 73.3 (IQR 51.8, 131.4) and 49.4 (IQR 31.4, 65.7) days for residents and attendings, respectively (p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS Resident involvement during TURBTs is associated with inconclusive pathology and delayed time to cystectomy. Future studies should assess educational tools to improve endoscopic surgical training techniques minimizing effects of resident learning on patient outcomes. Further studies are needed to clarify the impact of resident involvement on long-term patient outcomes. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e564 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Derek Bos More articles by this author Christopher Allard More articles by this author Shawn Dason More articles by this author Vladimir Ruzhynsky More articles by this author Anil Kapoor More articles by this author Bobby Shayegan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».