MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1727212733 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.2649

Improved effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi (<2 cm): A retrospective study

2015· article· en· W1727212733 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shuqiu Chen, Bin Xu, Ning Liu, Hua Jiang, Xiaowen Zhang, Yu‐Shih Yang, Jing Liu, G.-Z. Sha, Weidong Zhu, Ming Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJiangsu Science and Technology DepartmentSoutheast University
KeywordsUreteroscopyMedicineSurgeryRenal pelvisIncidence (geometry)LithotripsyRetrospective cohort studyAdverse effectUrologyUreterInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We discuss the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi with a burden of <2 cm, as well as the prevention and treatment of complications. METHODS: A total of 108 renal calculi with flexible ureteroscopy and holmium laser treatment were retrospectively analyzed. The stone-free rate was evaluated. The effectiveness, safety, surgical technique, incidence of complications, and relevant treatments were analyzed. RESULTS: All patients underwent only one lithotripsy procedure. The success rate of flexible ureteroscopy was 97.2% (105/108). Among the 105 cases, the total lithotripsy success rate was 97.1% (101/105). The total stone-free rate after 8 weeks post-operation was 94.3% (99/105), the stone-free rate of the lower calyx was 85.7% (30/35); it was 98.6% (69/70) in the middle-upper calyceal and renal pelvis. The incidence of complications was 12.9% (14/108). None of the patients had serious adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Flexible ureteroscopy represents an optimal treatment option for selected renal calculi with burden of <2 cm. The effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopy can be further improved through reasonable preoperative evaluation and advances in surgical techniques, as well as a better understanding of the inducement and treatment of 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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