MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multimodal management of urolithiasis in renal transplantation

2005· article· en· W1992519230 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Challacombe, Prokar Dasgupta, R. C. Tiptaft, Jonathan Glass, G. Koffman, David Goldsmith, Muhammad Shamim Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExtracorporeal shock wave lithotripsyAnuriaPercutaneous nephrolithotomySurgeryUreteroscopyUrinary systemTransplantationStentSepsisLithotripsyPercutaneousUreterInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report the largest single series of renal transplant patients (adults and children) with urolithiasis, assess the risk factors associated with urolithiasis in renal transplant recipients, and report the outcome of the multimodal management by endourological and open procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of all patients undergoing renal transplantation between 1977 and 2003 were reviewed. In all, 2085 patients had a renal transplant at our centre and 21 (17 adults and four children) developed urinary tract calculi. Their mode of presentation, investigations, treatments, complications and outcomes were recorded. Investigations included one or more of the following; ultrasonography (US), plain abdominal X-ray, intravenous urography, nephrostogram and computed tomography. Management of these calculi involved extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), flexible ureteroscopy and in situ lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), open pyelolithotomy and open cystolitholapaxy. RESULTS: Thirteen patients had renal calculi, seven had ureteric calculi and one had bladder calculi. The incidence of urolithiasis was 21/2085 (1.01%) in the series. Urolithiasis was incidentally discovered on routine US in six patients, six presented with oliguria or anuria, including one with acute renal failure, four with a painful graft, three with haematuria, one with sepsis secondary to obstruction and infection and in one, urolithiasis was found after failure to remove a stent. Ten patients (63%) had an identifiable metabolic cause for urolithiasis, two by obstruction, two stent-related, one secondary to infection and in six no cause was identifiable. Thirteen required more than one treatment method; 13 (69%) were treated by ESWL, eight of whom required multiple sessions; eight required ureteric stent insertion before a second procedure and four required a nephrostomy tube to relieve obstruction. Two patients had flexible ureteroscopy and stone extraction, three had a PCNL and one had open cystolithotomy. PCNL failed in one patient who subsequently had successful open pyelolithotomy. All patients were rendered stone-free when different treatments were combined. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of urolithiasis in renal transplant patients is low. There is a high incidence of metabolic causes and therefore renal transplant patients with urolithiasis should undergo comprehensive metabolic screening. Management of these patients requires a multidisciplinary approach by renal physicians, transplant surgeons and urologists.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations131
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207