Is an overnight stay after percutaneous nephrolithotomy safe?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish a clinical care pathway that plans for hospital discharge the day after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), to evaluate the safety, effectiveness and feasibility of this pathway, and to identify factors associated with a postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS) of >1 day. PCNL is the treatment of choice for patients with large kidney stones and those in whom extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy has failed, and the mean LOS is typically 2-5 days. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 109 patients (mean age 57.4 years; 58 men, 53%) who had PCNL between 2006 and 2009. All had nephrostomy tubes placed after surgery. The patients' demographics, LOS, incidence of complications, clinical outcomes, stone-free rates, number of early postoperative emergency-room visits, need for subsequent admission and/or other procedures, were noted and analysed. The modified Clavien classification was used to describe the postoperative complications. Bivariate analyses were used to test for associations between LOS and other variables. RESULTS: The mean (range) stone size was 2.2 (0.9-5.9) cm, and the mean (SEM) LOS was 1.7 (0.13) days. Of the 109 patients, 20% had a LOS of >1 day for surgical, 3% for medical and 5% for social reasons. The stone-free rate was 89%. There was no difference in the number of subsequent hospital visits or ancillary procedures for patients discharged after one or more postoperative nights. No variables were associated with a longer LOS. CONCLUSIONS: An overnight hospital stay after PCNL is safe and represents an effective strategy for improved bed use in selected patients. A longer LOS was not affected by patient age or body mass index, stone size or operative time. We continue to use our clinical care pathway, as supported by these data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".