MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cavernosal nerve mapping: current data and applications

2003· review· en· W2035609032 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTumescenceNeurovascular bundleSural nerveProstatectomyStimulationAnesthesiaSurgeryUrologyPenisInternal medicineProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are four reviews in this month's section, two relating to the technical aspects of treating prostate cancer, one to genetic instability and bladder cancer, and the final one about continence surgery in urogenital prolapse. The authors are from Canada, the USA, and the UK. The messages from all of the reviews are clear, and provide interesting reading. The contributions to this section continue to give considerable information, and there are many more to follow. Although nerve‐sparing prostatectomy is widely practised, the results with respect to preserving potency often do not meet expectations. The concept of intraoperative cavernosal nerve stimulation is reasonable. Data that link the response to sildenafil after prostatectomy with bilateral nerve sparing has increased the importance of optimizing nerve sparing. The cavernosal nerves are often difficult to visualize and may have a variable course. A tumescent response to nerve stimulation can be shown consistently; the response may be subtle, and characterized by a minimal increase in penile circumference and blood flow. Immediately after prostatectomy, proximal nerve stimulation identifies whether neural continuity has been maintained, and is predictive of recovery of erectile function. The Cavermap TM system (Uromed Corporation, Boston, MA, USA) was developed to permit intraoperative nerve stimulation with tumescence monitoring. An initial phase 2 and subsequent phase 3 single‐blinded, randomized, multicentre study that compared Cavermap‐assisted prostatectomy with conventional nerve sparing showed a significant benefit in terms of the duration of nocturnal tumescence at 1 year. Other approaches are being explored, including incorporating the device into sural or genito‐femoral nerve grafting, use of nerve stimulation during cystectomy or abdominal‐perineal resection, and direct corpus cavernosal pressure monitoring during nerve stimulation. These approaches warrant further evaluation.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.235 · 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