The fate of the upper urinary tract in exstrophy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated the impact of reconstructive bladder procedures on the upper urinary tract in bladder/cloacal exstrophy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 patients underwent bladder neck procedures for urinary incontinence due to bladder exstrophy between 1988 and 2001. We correlated evidence of renal injury to urinary continence and type of surgery. Renal scarring and moderate/severe hydronephrosis were considered significant upper tract changes. RESULTS: Overall 27 patients (47%) underwent bladder neck closure, 38 (67%) augmentation cystoplasty and 44 (77%) a Mitrofanoff procedure. Mean interval since last continence procedure was 4.5 years and mean patient age at last followup was 11.7 years. Hydronephrosis was noted in 18 patients (32%) at last followup (after bladder neck reconstruction in 15). Renal scarring in 14 cases on dimercapto-succinic acid scan was evenly distributed regardless of the type of bladder neck procedure or presence of augmentation. Of 6 patients with grade 3 to 4 hydronephrosis 5 had renal scarring versus only 1 in the 39 without hydronephrosis (p <0.0001). Serum creatinine remained normal in 55 patients, mild renal insufficiency developed in 1 and renal transplantation was performed in 1. Two patients with persistent incontinence are anticipating an augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Of our 57 patients with exstrophy 14 (24%) had significant upper tract damage in the form of renal scarring and/or moderate or severe hydronephrosis. The surgical method of achieving continence was not predictive of hydronephrosis or scarring. Bladder neck closure appears to provide better urinary continence and was equally safe with respect to hydronephrosis or scarring compared to patent forms of bladder neck reconstruction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".