Early Catheter Removal following Transurethral Prostatectomy: A Study of 431 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess and review catheter removal on the first day after transurethral prostatectomy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 431 consecutive patients who underwent transurethral prostatectomy between 2000 and 2003 at a Scarborough General Hospital, Toronto, Canada. The equipment used was a standard resectoscope with a regular loop. No roller ball or other gadget was used. The cutting and coagulation electrical variables were standard at 160 and 60 W for the generator used. The decision to remove the catheters was based on normal vital signs, adequate urine output, absence of clots and acceptable color of the catheter effluent. RESULTS: Catheters were removed in 415 (96.3%) patients on postoperative day 1. Of the 415 patients 332 (80.0%) were discharged on the same day. The criteria for catheter removal on postoperative day 1 were not met in 16 (3.7%) patients and the mean indwelling catheter time was 4.8 +/- 2.4 days and the mean length of hospital stay after surgery was 6.2 +/- 3.3 days. For the entire group, the mean indwelling catheter time was 1.1 +/- 0.8 days and the mean length of hospital stay after surgery was 1.6 +/- 1.5 days. Risk factors which predicted delayed removal were age, postoperative bleeding and several comorbidities, that is coronary heart disease, renal insufficiency and Alzheimer's disease. CONCLUSIONS: Removal of the catheter on the first postoperative day after transurethral prostatectomy seems to be feasible, safe and cost-effective without increasing significant morbidity in selected patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".