Holmium laser vs. conventional (cold knife) direct visual internal urethrotomy for short-segment bulbar urethral stricture: Outcome analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to analyze the outcome between holmium laser and cold knife direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) for short-segment bulbar urethral stricture. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study comprised of 112 male patients seen from June 2013 to December 2014. Inclusion criterion was short-segment bulbar urethral stricture (≤1.5cm). Exclusion criteria were prior intervention/urethroplasty, pan-anterior urethral strictures, posterior stenosis, urinary tract infection, and those who lost to followup. Patients were divided into two groups; Group A (n=58) included cold knife DVIU and group B (n=54) included holmium laser endourethrotomy patients. Patient followup included uroflowmetry at postoperative Day 3, as well as at three months and six months. RESULTS: Baseline demographics were comparable in both groups. A total of 107 patients met the inclusion criteria and five patients were excluded due to inadequate followup. Mean stricture length was 1.31 ± 0.252 cm (p=0.53) and 1.34 ± 0.251 cm in Groups A and B, respectively. Mean operating time in Group A was 16.3 ± 1.78 min and in Group B was 20.96 ± 2.23 min (p=0.0001). Five patients in Group A had bleeding after the procedure that was managed conservatively by applying perineal compression. Three patients in Group B had fluid extravasation postoperatively. Qmax (ml/s) was found to be statistically insignificant between the two groups at all followups. CONCLUSIONS: Both holmium laser and cold knife urethrotomy are safe and equally effective in treating short-segment bulbar urethral strictures in terms of outcome and complication rate. However, holmium laser requires more expertise and is a costly alternative.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".