Impact of nerve stimulator-guided obturator nerve block on the short-term outcomes and complications of transurethral resection of bladder tumour: A prospective randomized controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this prospective randomized controlled study, we investigated the efficacy of obturator nerve block (ONB) on adductor muscle spasm and related short-term outcomes and complications in patients who underwent transurethral resection of lateral wall-located bladder tumours (TURBT). METHODS: Between July 2014 and February 2015, 70 patients scheduled to undergo TUR of lateral bladder wall tumours were enrolled in the study. All patients were preoperatively evaluated by cystoscopy and imaging tools and selected according to localized tumours on the lateral bladder wall. Patients were randomly allocated to Group SA (35 patients who underwent only spinal anesthesia) and Group ONB (35 patients who underwent spinal anesthesia combined with ONB by the nerve stimulator). An independent observer, blinded to the approach, evaluated the obturator signs, including adductor muscle contraction, bladder perforation, and completeness of the resection during the TURBT procedure. RESULTS: The differences between groups regarding mean operation time, tumour size, and number were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Adductor muscle contraction was detected in 40% of patients in Group SA and 11.4% in Group ONB. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.021). Complete bladder perforation was detected in 2 patients in Group SA, whereas no perforation was observed in Group ONB. There was no case of severe bleeding in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found that ONB performed after spinal anesthesia was effective in preventing intraoperative complications due to adductor muscle spasm while performing TURBT. Our study limitations include its small sample size, since we only enrolled patients with primary lateral wall-localized bladder tumour. Also, we excluded patients who underwent bipolar TURBT.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".