MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153279005 · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67031-0

A RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY OF INTRAOPERATIVE CAVERNOUS NERVE STIMULATION WITH PENILE TUMESCENCE MONITORING TO IMPROVE NERVE SPARING DURING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY

2000· article· en· W2153279005 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTumescenceProstatectomyUrologyNerve sparingNerve stimulationErectile dysfunctionStimulationSurgeryProstateInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We determine if mapping of the cavernous nerve during radical prostatectomy using intraoperative cavernous nerve stimulation with tumescence monitoring results in improved erectile potency compared to conventional nerve sparing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single blinded study was performed on 61 patients at 6 centers. Patients had elected to undergo nerve sparing prostatectomy and had normal preoperative erectile function documented by the Sexual Function Inventory Questionnaire (SFIQ) and RigiScan parallel testing. Patients were randomized between conventional nerve sparing and nerve sparing assisted by the CaverMap Surgical Aid. paragraph sign In all patients neural continuity was assessed immediately after prostate removal by proximal cavernous nerve stimulation. All patients were blinded according to their allocation cohort. RESULTS: At 1 year there was substantial improvement in erectile function in the CaverMap group as measured by RigiScan. This group had a mean of 15. 9 minutes of greater than 60% nocturnal tumescence compared to 2.1 minutes in the conventional nerve sparing group (p <0.024). By SFIQ there was a nonsignificant trend to improved potency in the CaverMap group (71% versus 62%, p = 0.17). Of patients who had bilateral, unilateral and no response to stimulation after resection erectile function assessed by SFIQ recovered in 68%, 27% and 0%, respectively (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: CaverMap assisted prostatectomy led to improved erectile function as assessed by RigiScan testing with no associated adverse events. A response to stimulation immediately after removal of the prostate accurately predicted return of erectile function.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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