Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy on Outpatient Basis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluated the possibility of performing in our midst the open radical prostatectomy with discharge on the same day of the procedure, aiming the improvement of postoperative recovery and reduce hospital costs without loss of quality of care, or decreased patient satisfaction with treatment. Patients and Methods: We selected 27 patients with localized prostate cancer during the period from April 2011 to January 2012, which had a low surgical risk and opted for the open radical prostatectomy. We evaluated the feasibility of outpatient open radical prostatectomy, perioperative complications, and patient satisfaction with treatment. Results: Eleven (40.7%) patients were discharged on the same day of the procedure; thirteen were discharged in the morning after surgery and three in the second postoperative day. All patients underwent general anesthesia. The use of opioids in safe doses for epidural anesthesia was administered in 13 patients, improving pain control and enabling early discharge in 8 (61.5%) patients. Only 3 (21.4%) patients who did not receive epidural opioid achieved discharge on the same day of surgery (p = 0.04). No patient had a major complication or was readmitted to the hospital. There was no difference in patient satisfaction with treatment between the group of the same day surgery and the patients with longer hospitalization. Conclusion: The open radical prostatectomy can be performed with safety on an outpatient basis, in properly selected patients, with no decrease in patient satisfaction with treatment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".