A Prospective Evaluation of Sexual Function and Quality of Life After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the effect of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on sexual function and quality of life in men and women. METHODS: Sexual function of patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis from February 2005 to June 2006 was prospectively evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function in men and Female Sexual Function Index in women. Quality of life was assessed using the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire. Preoperative scores were compared with scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 110 patients eligible for inclusion, 59 (53.6 percent) agreed to participate. Male sexual function and erectile function scores remained high 12 months after surgery (mean International Index of Erectile Function score 51.7 preoperative vs. 58.3 at 12 months postoperative; P = not significant (NS)). Abnormal sexual function decreased from 33.3 percent before surgery to 22.7 percent 12 months after surgery (P = NS). Female sexual function improved 12 months after surgery (mean Female Sexual Function Index score 19.2 preoperative vs. 27 at 12 months postoperative; P = 0.031). Abnormal sexual function decreased from 73.1 percent before surgery to 25 percent 12 months after surgery (P = 0.001). Quality of life significantly improved after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: In men, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis does not have an adverse effect on sexual function, whereas sexual function in women seems to improve 12 months after surgery.
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".