Concomitant Endoureterotomy and Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Subureteral Injection for Management of Obstructive Refluxing Megaureter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present the results of our experience with combined endoureterotomy and endoscopic injection of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid (Deflux) for the treatment of primary obstructive refluxing megaureter (PORM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighteen children (12 female, 6 male; mean age-14 months) with 20 PORM units underwent concomitant endoureterotomy and endoscopic subureteral Deflux injection. All patients underwent endoureterotomy at the 6-o'clock position with insertion of a 3F Double-J ureteral stent into the obstructed segment of ureter and subureteral injection of Deflux at the 5-o'clock and 7-o'clock positions. The Double-J stent was left in place with its distal tip fixed with a single knot to the external genitalia for easy removal after 1 week. Patients with refluxing nonobstructive ureter on the contralateral side of the PORM unit (seven children) underwent simultaneous endoscopic subureteral injection of Deflux. Voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) was performed at 6 months, and ultrasonography was performed at 1 week 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: With a mean follow-up of 30 months, the procedure was uneventful in all patients. Follow-up VCUG showed no evidence of reflux in 15 ureterorenal (75%), significant decrease in reflux grade in 2 (10%), and no change in 3 (15%) in the endoscopic treated PORM units. No evidence of reflux was observed in the treated contralateral refluxing nonobstructive ureters. Ultrasonography revealed no ureterovesical junction obstruction. In 19 ureterorenal (95%) units, there was a complete resolution or decrease in hydroureteronephrosis. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that combined endoureterotomy and subureteral injection of Deflux is safe and effective in the treatment of PORM in selected patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".