A novel approach to the repair of urethrocutaneous fistulae arising after abdominoperineal anorectal resection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report describes a novel approach to the repair of perineal urethrocutaneous fistulae (UCF) after abdominoperineal resection (APR). A 62-year-old patient developed a UCF after an APR for rectal cancer complicated by perineal abscess formation. The patient presented with continuous urinary drainage from the fistula that persisted despite a number of conservative and surgical measures. The patient underwent successful repair of the urethrocutaneous fistula in prone position-an approach that has not previously been described in the literature. Repair was performed by the multi-disciplinary team of a reconstructive urologist, colorectal surgeon, and plastic surgeon. Post-operative retrograde urethrogram demonstrated the absence of a persistent fistula tract and the patient has been continent for 18 months. The prone approach for UCF repair allows for excellent access to the fistula tract for posterior urethroplasty in a patient that has had prior APR.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".