MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1529421184 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.2442

Colon perforation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy and fistula closure with Spongostan following conservative therapy

2015· article· en· W1529421184 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sıtkı Ün, Volkan Çakır, Osman Köse, Hakan Türk, Yüksel Yılmaz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous nephrolithotomyFistulaSurgeryCatheterPerforationPercutaneousComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the first-line treatment for kidney stones. Colon perforation is a rare, but dangerous, complication. Colonic perforation might be very serious if it is not found early. After an unsuccessful extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, a 45-year-old female underwent a left-sided PCNL for two 1-cm kidney stones in the left kidney upper pole calyx. During dilatation, a colon perforation was suspected. The procedure was finished by inserting a 14Fr re-entry catheter into the colon. On postoperative day 5, a fluoroscopy was performed by injecting contrast dye through the re-entry catheter, which showed a fistula formation between skin and colon. The catheter was removed completely. A 16Fr external drainage catheter was inserted over the guide-wire through the fistula tract. The fistula was closed by introducing prepared absorbable hemostatic gelatin powder (Spongostan) particles into the fistula tract through the catheter. Fistula tracks can be closed early by injecting absorbable Spongostan particles into the colonic fistula tract, thereby reducing inpatient time and increasing patient comfort.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments→French-language works237,207→