Experiences and outcomes of organ-sparing surgery for testicular tumour with benign tendency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We retrospectively investigated and summarized our experiences and the outcomes of organ-sparing surgery (OSS) for testicular tumour with benign tendency. METHODS: From April 2000 to March 2012, 11 selected patients with testicular tumour underwent OSS. Preoperative and postoperative organ functional and oncologic indexes were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: All operations were completed without conversion to radical orchiectomy. Intraoperative frozen section and routine postoperative pathology showed tumours with benign tendency. The normal appearance of the scrotum and functional integrity of the testis were preserved. Preoperative and postoperative serum sex hormone levels, international index of erectile function (IIEF-5) scores, and semen quality were not significantly different. Tumour recurrence or metastasis did not occur during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed the feasibility and safety of OSS to treat testicular tumour with benign tendency. With careful selection and rigorous follow-up, some testis tumor can be treated with OSS to maximally maintain normal appearance and function of the testis. The retrospective single-centre study and small sample size are main limitations. More evidence is needed to establish the large-scale application of OSS.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".