A comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy under intravenous sedation for the management of distal ureteric calculi.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We have performed a study to compare shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy under intravenous sedation for the management of distal ureteric calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient tolerance, procedure times and treatment outcomes were prospectively evaluated in 110 patients undergoing 138 SWL treatments, and 172 patients undergoing ureteroscopy under intravenous sedation for the management of distal ureteric calculi. RESULTS: Men tolerated SWL better than ureteroscopy. Over 90% of women tolerated both procedures well. Procedure times were 52 minutes for SWL and 27 minutes for ureteroscopy. Treatment was successful in 72% of patients undergoing SWL, and 95% of patients undergoing ureteroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In women with distal ureteric calculi requiring treatment, we recommend ureteroscopy under intravenous sedation as the treatment of first choice. In men the better tolerance of SWL must be weighed against the higher success rate of ureteroscopy. If both treatment modalities are available, patients with small distal ureteric calculi, in whom ureteroscopy is likely to be successful, should be informed of and offered their choice of either treatment modality.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".