Renal cancer seeding metastases following retroperitoneoscopic-assisted cryoablation: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nephron-sparing laparoscopy is the standard surgical treatment for clinical T1a renal tumours. However, the laparoscopic technique brings in its specific oncological safety concerns. Seeding metastases are reported: peritoneal metastases, port-tract metastases, and (sub-) cutaneous metastases. The method of laparoscopic assisted renal mass cryoablation is marked by the fact that traumatic tumour tissue handling is unavoidable. This case report reviews the rare occasion of seeding metastases in the retroperitoneal space following laparoscopic cryoablation of a small renal mass. The primary tumour showed no focal recurrence as reported by histological examination. The combination of two events as harming the integrity of cancer tissue and gas-circulation leading to the development of metastases in the retroperitoneal cavity is discussed. The combination of iatrogenic harming cancer tissue integrity and CO2-circulation leads to metastases in the retroperitoneal cavity. Therefore, we recommend performing image-guided renal mass biopsies before considering cryoablative surgery.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".