MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vaginal Vault Dehiscence After Hysterectomy

2009· article· en· W2088188202 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Agdi, Wadha Al-Ghafri, Rommel Antolin, Jeff Arrington, Kenneth R. O’Kelley, Angus J.M. Thomson, Togas Tulandi

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDehiscenceVaginal vaultHysterectomyVault (architecture)SurgeryWound dehiscenceVaginal Vault ProlapseComplicationRetrospective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)General surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vaginal vault dehiscence, a surgical emergency, is a rare complication of hysterectomy that can occur a few weeks, several months, or years after the operation. Its incidence in several studies ranged from 0.03% to 0.3%. There is relatively little detailed information on predisposing factors for vault dehiscence and its manifestation after hysterectomy. This retrospective case series and literature review evaluated factors predisposing to vault dehiscence after hysterectomy and its manifestation. A total of 54 cases of vault dehiscence were identified: 16 were unpublished cases of vaginal vault dehiscence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy obtained from 5 physicians participating in the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists Endo Exchange List (group A) and 38 cases were found in an English-language literature search (group B). Participating physicians completed a detailed questionnaire containing demographic data, indications and type of hysterectomy, operative procedure, predisposing factors, and potential triggering factors for dehiscence. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the keywords ‘‘vault dehiscence,” ‘‘vaginal vault dehiscence,” ‘‘vault prolapse,” and ‘‘hysterectomy.” The data for groups A and B were analyzed separately and combined. All but one of the vaginal vault dehiscence in group A occurred after laparoscopic hysterectomy. In group B from the literature, 44.7% occurred after abdominal hysterectomy, 34.2% after laparoscopic hysterectomy, and 21.1% after vaginal hysterectomy. In group A, vault dehiscence was diagnosed an average of 3 weeks (3–6.5) after hysterectomy; and, in group B, dehiscence occurred an average of 10.5 weeks (8–16) (P = 0.0007, confidence interval = −9.5 to −4). The majority of vaginal vault dehiscence occurred after sexual intercourse (58.8%), but defecation preceded dehiscence in 8.8% of patients, regular housework in 8.8%, and 14.7% was reported to be spontaneous. The time interval between hysterectomy and vaginal vault dehiscence was significantly shorter after laparoscopic hysterectomy (7 [3–11] weeks) compared with abdominal (13 [8–24] weeks) or vaginal (116 [108–156] weeks) (P = <0.0001, confidence interval = −153.5 to −88). The type of vaginal vault closure after hysterectomy or vault fraction was not significant. The most common symptoms among the 54 combined cases were bleeding (50% and bowel prolapse [48.1%]). These findings suggest that vaginal vault dehiscence occurs more frequently after the laparoscopic procedure than after other hysterectomy techniques. Other predisposing risk factors include early resumption of sexual intercourse and regular activities before healing is complete.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207