The effect of intracalyceal distribution on the clearance of renal stones of ≥ 20 mm in children after extracorporeal lithotripsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this section there are five papers covering a range of topics. Authors from Pakistan, Hong Kong, England, Greece, Canada and Turkey have written about different issues: intra‐calyceal distribution, dynamic MR urography to assess drainage in dilated pelvicalyceal systems, perineal pain after enterocystoplasty in bladder exstrophy, PSA assessment in childhood, and the use of video‐urodynamics in managing non‐neurogenic voiding dysfunction. OBJECTIVES To determine the effect of the intracalyceal distribution of renal stones on clearance rates after treating paediatric nephrolithiasis with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). PATIENTS AND METHODS We assessed a retrospective case series of children (aged ≤ 14 years) undergoing lithotripsy on an MPL 9000 (Dornier GmbH, Germany) echo‐guided lithotripter. Patients were identified using an international coding and indexing system and ESWL registry. In all, 125 children were treated during 1990–2003, but 21 had stones of ≥ 20 mm. Stone clearance was assessed at 1 and 3 months, the stone‐free state being defined as no radiological evidence of stone or fragments of ≤ 3 mm. Failed treatments were analysed to identify any correlation with stone site. RESULTS The overall stone‐free rate was 81%; in four children the treatment failed (all girls) and subsequently they required ancillary procedures. Nineteen patients (90%) received up to three sessions of ESWL; two required four or more sessions. Of the four children in whom treatment failed, two had JJ stents; the stones were in the lower pole calyx in two, and the renal pelvis and lower pole calyx in two. The mean stone size in those where treatment failed was 25 mm, vs 21 mm in the stone‐free group. The complication rate was 19%, but only one child required admission to hospital. CONCLUSIONS ESWL is very effective for renal stones in children, with minimal morbidity. Lower pole and partial staghorn stones with a major component in the lower pole calyx should preferably be treated by a percutaneous approach.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".