MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011144550 · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3181cf8ed0

Sacral Nerve Stimulation for Fecal Incontinence

2010· article· en· W2011144550 on OpenAlexaff
Steven D. Wexner, John A. Coller, Ghislain Devroede, Tracy L. Hull, Richard W. McCallum, Miranda K. Y. Chan, Jennifer M. Ayscue, Abbas Shobeiri, David A. Margolin, Michael England, Howard S. Kaufman, William J. Snape, Ece Mutlu, Heidi K Chua, Paul D. Pettit, Deborah Nagle, Robert D. Madoff, Darin R. Lerew, Anders Mellgren

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFecal incontinenceSacral nerve stimulationStimulationLumbosacral plexusUrologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Background: Sacral nerve stimulation has been approved for use in treating urinary incontinence in the United States since 1997, and in Europe for both urinary and fecal incontinence (FI) since 1994. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation in a large population under the rigors of Food and Drug Administration-approved investigational protocol. Methods: Candidates for SNS who provided informed consent were enrolled in this Institutional Review Board-approved multicentered prospective trial. Patients showing ≥50% improvement during test stimulation received chronic implantation of the InterStim Therapy (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN). The primary efficacy objective was to demonstrate that ≥50% of subjects would achieve therapeutic success, defined as ≥50% reduction of incontinent episodes per week at 12 months compared with baseline. Results: A total of 133 patients underwent test stimulation with a 90% success rate, and 120 (110 females) of a mean age of 60.5 years and a mean duration of FI of 6.8 years received chronic implantation. Mean follow-up was 28 (range, 2.2–69.5) months. At 12 months, 83% of subjects achieved therapeutic success (95% confidence interval: 74%–90%; P < 0.0001), and 41% achieved 100% continence. Therapeutic success was 85% at 24 months. Incontinent episodes decreased from a mean of 9.4 per week at baseline to 1.9 at 12 months and 2.9 at 2 years. There were no reported unanticipated adverse device effects associated with InterStim Therapy. Conclusion: Sacral nerve stimulation using InterStim Therapy is a safe and effective treatment for patients with FI. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of SNS in a large population under the rigors of an FDA-approved investigational protocol. 133 patients underwent test stimulation with a 90% success rate, and 120 (110 females), of a mean age of 60.5 years and a mean FI duration of 6.8 years, received chronic implantation. Sacral nerve stimulation using IterStim Therapy is a safe and effective treatment for patients with FI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations350
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207