Long-term results of pediatric renal transplantation into a dysfunctional lower urinary tract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The authors reviewed their long-term experience with pediatric renal transplantation into a dysfunctional lower urinary tract to evaluate the results of contemporary lower urinary tract evaluation and management on graft survival and function. METHODS: Between 1990 and 1996, 21 renal transplants were performed in 20 children with dysfunctional lower urinary tracts and 61 transplants were performed in 61 patients with normal lower urinary tracts. The minimum follow-up was 36 months (mean, 62.0 +/- 19.6 months). The cause of lower urinary tract dysfunction included posterior urethral valves (n=13), prune belly syndrome (n=4), meningomyelocele (n=2), and urogenital sinus abnormality (n=1). Urodynamics were performed on all children with dysfunctional lower urinary tracts. Using these perioperative assessments, lower tract management strategies were devised, including timed voiding alone (n=6), clean intermittent catheterization (n=8), bladder augmentation (n=4), and supravesical urinary diversion (n=2). RESULTS: Overall 5-year actuarial patient and graft survival rates were 100% versus 95% (P=not significant [NS]) and 83% versus 69% in the dysfunctional and normal urinary tract groups (P=NS), respectively. Mean serum creatinine levels in dysfunctional and normal urinary tract patients with functioning grafts at 3 years were 1.3 +/- 0.5 and 1.3 +/- 0.7 mg/dL, respectively (P=NS). However, 35% of patients with a dysfunctional lower urinary tract experienced urologic complications. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric renal transplantation into a dysfunctional lower urinary tract yields outcomes comparable to transplantation into the normal lower urinary tract. Because of the high urologic complication rates, careful surveillance of lower urinary tract function by urodynamic evaluation is essential to optimize these outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".