MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510605972 · doi:10.1089/end.2014.0899

A Prospective Randomized Study of Pfannenstiel Versus Expanded Port Site Incision for Intact Specimen Extraction in Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy

2015· article· en· W1510605972 on OpenAlex
Saleh Binsaleh, Khaled Madbouly, Edward D. Matsumoto, Anil Kapoor

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endourology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMinimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNephrectomySurgeryPort (circuit theory)LaparoscopyUrologyRandomized controlled trialKidneyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare intra- and postoperative outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with intact specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel (PFN) transverse suprapubic or expanded port site (EPS) incision in a prospective randomized fashion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic transperitoneal radical nephrectomies for suspected renal tumors were randomized for intact renal specimen extraction via a PFN or EPS incision. Operative, perioperative, 1 week, 6 weeks, and 6 months postoperative parameters were prospectively recorded and analyzed including specimen weight, size in maximum diameter, incision length, total operative time, extraction time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, pain score in the postoperative holding area and on the first post operative day, narcotic consumption, time to fluid intake/full diet intake, unassisted ambulation, cosmesis, and wound-related complications. A postoperative quality-of-life questionnaire was also filled out by all the patients. RESULTS: Our series included 51 patients: 26 in the PFN group and 25 in the EPS group. The two groups were similar in demographic characteristics and intraoperative and postoperative parameters apart from a longer PFN incision (P<0.00). First postoperative day pain score was significantly less in the PFN group than in the EPS group (P=0.023). Complication rate was less in the PFN group, although not statistically significant. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the PFN than in the EPS group (P=0.01). Mean cosmesis and operative satisfaction scores at week 1, week 6, and 6 month visits were not significantly different between both groups. Compared with the EPS group, PFN group patients significantly will choose the same operation if they would do it again (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: PFN incision has less morbidity, pain score, and hospital stay compared with EPS incision for intact specimen extraction after transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Both incisions are associated with high operative satisfaction, good cosmesis, and a low rate of wound complications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.319 · 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