Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Patients with Urinary Tract Abnormalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with urinary tract abnormalities are at an increased risk of stone formation. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) plays an important role in the treatment of this patient population; however, outcomes are less well defined compared with patients with normal urinary tract anatomy. Our objective was to evaluate the influence of urinary tract abnormalities on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes with PCNL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We report on a single-center prospective database of 2284 consecutive PCNLs in 1935 patients from 1990 to 2012. For the purposes of this analysis, patients were categorized by the presence or absence of a urinary tract abnormality. Multivariable analyses were used to identify independent predictors of the length of hospital stay, operative time, complications, and residual stones at discharge and 3 months. RESULTS: A urinary tract abnormality was present in 14.4% (n=330) of the cohort. On univariable analysis, patients with urinary tract abnormalities were more likely to present with urinary tract infection (28% vs 19%, P<0.001) and less likely to present with hematuria (13% vs 19%, P<0.02). On multivariable regression, a urinary tract abnormality was predictive of residual stone at discharge, need for a secondary procedure, but did not increase the risk of residual stone at 3 months or the development of complications. Operative time and hospital stay were only moderately prolonged. CONCLUSION: Patients with urinary tract abnormalities who undergo PCNL have a higher risk of residual stones at discharge and need for secondary procedures, but comparable complication rates, operative time, and hospital stay.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".