Long-term functional outcomes after bladder exstrophy repair: A single, low-volume centre experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this study, we present our experience managing bladder exstrophy (BE) in a low-volume centre over 24 years. METHODS: Charts of patients with BE between 1990 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with BE closure and ≥5 years followup were included. BE closure was carried out in the first two days of life using either complete primary repair (CPRE) or modern-staged repair (MSRE). Daytime urinary continence (UC) was evaluated by the age of five years. Patients were considered continent if completely dry for ≥3 hours using no or one pad/day. Incontinent patients with bladder capacity (BC) ≥100 ml underwent bladder neck reconstruction (BNR) and bilateral ureteric reimplantation (BUR), while patients with BC <100ml underwent simultaneous augmentation cystoplasty (ACP). RESULTS: Sixteen (16) patients met our inclusion criteria with a mean followup time of 18±5 years. Ten (10) underwent CPRE, while six underwent MSRE. Four surgeons were involved in patients' management. Two surgeons had previous experience in BE surgery while working in other institutions. Complications included dehiscence in five patients, vesicocutanous fistula in three and breakthrough UTI in eight. Continence was achieved in 15/16 patients: two after BE closure only, seven with BNR, and six who required ACP and BNR. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the small number of patients and the reterospective nature of the study, some observations are noteworthy. Although continence rate post-primary BE closure was initially low, it rose to 93.8% after auxiliary continence procedures. This might be at the cost of urethral voiding, which was achieved in 60% of patients. Our small cohort did not show clear advantage of CPRE vs. MSRE. Our outcomes may not be different from high-volume centres due to the fact that two exstrophy-experienced surgeons performed most primary or subsequent surgeries. For this reason, we recommend assigning designated centres for BE repair for both new and repeat cases.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".