Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obstructive azoospermia secondary to epididymal obstruction can be corrected by microsurgical reconstruction with vasoepididymostomy (VE). Although alternative management such as epididymal or testicular sperm aspiration in conjunction with intracytoplasmic sperm injection is feasible, various studies have established the superior cost-effectiveness of VE as a treatment of choice. Microsurgical VE is considered one of the most technically challenging microsurgeries. Its success rate is highly dependent on the skills and experience of the surgeons. Various techniques have been described in the literature for VE. We have pioneered a technique known as longitudinal intussusception VE (LIVE) in which the epididymal tubule is opened longitudinally to obtain a larger opening to allow its tubular content to pass through the anastomosis. Our preliminary data demonstrated a patency rate of over 90%. This technique has been widely referenced in the recent literature including robotic-assisted microsurgery. The history of the development of different VE approaches, the preoperative evaluation along with the techniques of various VE will be described in this article.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".