MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333260511 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1485

1653 LONG-TERM OUTCOME OF AUGMENTATION ENTEROCYSTOPLASTY FOR NEUROGENIC BLADDER

2012· article· en· W2333260511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sender Herschorn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBladder augmentationSurgeryUrinary continenceSpinal cord injurySpina bifidaCystoscopyUrinary incontinenceUrinary bladderUrodynamic testingUrethraCystostomyLumbosacral plexusUrologyUrinary systemSpinal cordInternal medicineProstatectomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Incontinence/Female Urology: Neurogenic Voiding Dysfunction1 Apr 20121653 LONG-TERM OUTCOME OF AUGMENTATION ENTEROCYSTOPLASTY FOR NEUROGENIC BLADDER Sender Herschorn Sender HerschornSender Herschorn Toronto, Canada More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1485AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES To determine the long-term outcomes of augmentation enterocytoplasty (AE) in patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction and refractory incontinence. METHODS This is a retrospective analysis of adults undergoing AE. Preoperative work-up included cystoscopy, videourodynamics, upper tract imaging, and laboratory assessment. The need for simultaneous continence procedure and/or abdominal stoma was determined preoperatively. AE incorporated detubularized bowel into a widely opened bladder (clam cystoplasty). If the urethra was not usable for catheterization, continent abdominal stomas were done with the urethral outlet made competent at the time. Continence and reoperation rates were determined. RESULTS 145 patients (89 women and 56 men) underwent AE at a mean age of 32 years (range 18-69). 100 were wheelchair bound. Common diagnoses were spina bifida (73), spinal cord injury (47), and multiple sclerosis (9). 21 underwent undiversions from ileal conduits. Bowel segments included 17 colon and 128 ileum with 74 augmentations alone and 71 (59 females and 12 males) with continent abdominal stomas (done mostly with intussuscepted ileum with a tapered efferent limb). Continence procedures were done in 75 females (47 slings, 22 with slings and tapered bladder necks (BN), BN closure in 6) and 43 males (35 slings with BN tapering, 6 slings, and 2 BN closures). Patients were followed for a mean of 7.9 years (median 6.7). Continence was achieved 120 patients (83%). Mean bladder capacity increased from 206 ml preoperatively to 522 ml postoperatively (P<0.05). Mean pressure at capacity decreased from 42 cm of H2O to 14 cm of H2O (P<0.05). Sixty-five (45%) required re-operation. Reoperative surgeries included 30 for bladder stones, 8 BN revisions or closure, 5 conversion to continent stoma, 9 valve revisions, 9 stoma revisions, 2 parastomal hernia repairs, 1 BN closure, and 4 ileal conduits. The first reoperation was at mean of 5 years (median 3.8) and the second at a mean of 2.5 years (median 1.9) later. There were 2 bladder cancers at 4 and 18 years after AE ultimately resulting in death. Successful term pregnancies (2 vaginal and 2 C-sections) were seen in 4 women. CONCLUSIONS Follow up after AE reveals a high continence rate and significant improvement in urodynamic storage parameters. Despite a high rate of reoperation, AE with or without other reconstructive procedures is an effective option for intractable incontinence in these patients. Because of ongoing potential complications judicious long-term follow-up is mandatory. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e668 Peer Review Report Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sender Herschorn Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207