Intraoperative Cystoscopic Evaluation of Ureteral Patency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare different modalities to aid in the evaluation of intraoperative ureteral patency on cystoscopy in the postindigo carmine era. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial, participants undergoing pelvic surgery were randomized into one of four groups: saline distention (control), 10% dextrose distention, oral phenazopyridine, or intravenous sodium fluorescein. Our primary outcome was visibility of the ureteral jets. Secondary outcomes included surgeon satisfaction; adverse reactions including allergies, urinary tract infections, urinary retention, cystoscopy times, and ureteral obstruction; and delayed diagnosis. Participants were followed for 6 weeks. A sample size of 176 participants was planned to demonstrate a 30% difference in the visibility scale. All analyses were performed in an intention-to-treat fashion. RESULTS: From February 25, 2015, through August 2015, 176 participants were enrolled; 174 completed the trial, and two did not undergo intervention. Forty-four participants were included in the phenazopyridine, dextrose, saline, and sodium fluorescein groups. Sodium fluorescein and 10% dextrose resulted in significantly improved visibility and satisfaction when compared with the control group (P<.001 and P=.004, respectively). Dextrose provided the highest satisfaction and phenazopyridine provided lowest, but visibility was not statistically different between the two groups (P=.101). Three ureteral obstructions were identified intraoperatively and none in the postoperative period. Mean total cystoscopy time varied between 4.0 and 4.8 minutes and postoperative urinary retention rate was 50% across all groups. Overall urinary tract infection rate was 24.1%, which was similar between interventions. There were no related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Compared with the control, 10% dextrose and sodium fluorescein resulted in improved visibility and provided significantly more satisfaction in the evaluation for ureteral patency with no considerable increase in operative time or morbidity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02476448.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".