SURGICAL MANAGEMENT BY STANDING LAPAROSCOPY AND INGUINAL CELIOTOMY APPROACH OF THE CRYPTORCHID CANADIAN PONY STALLION – CASE REPORT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SURGICAL MANAGEMENT BY STANDING LAPAROSCOPY AND INGUINAL CELIOTOMY APPROACH OF THE CRYPTORCHID CANADIAN PONY STALLION – CASE REPORT Cornel IGNA1*, Roxana DASCALU1, Daniel BUMB1, Bogdan Sicoe1, Larisa SCHUSZLER1 1 Banat’s University of Agricultural Science and Veterinary Medicine, “King Michael I of Romania” from Timisoara, Romania *Corresponding author, e-mail: ignacornel@gmail.com Keywords: cryptorchidectomy, inguinal celiotomy, laparoscopic, stallion pony Introduction: Laparoscopic surgery has become an accepted method of identification and removal of intra-abdominal testes in the horse. Wilson and Madison – 1989 describe the use of laparoscopy to diagnose an abdominal retained testes. Since then numerous laparoscopic cryptorchidectomy techniques have been described. Aims: In the encountered specialty literature there are few reports in which standing laparoscopic cryptorchidectomy could not be performed in stallions including miniature horse too. Because there are no informations regarding laparoscopic surgery in large animals in romanian literature this report describes the surgical management of a Canadian pony diagnosed with partial abdominal unilaterally cryptorchidism at which laparoscopic castration has failed and the removal of the retained testicle has been made through inguinal celiotomy. Materials and Methods: A 4-year-old unilaterally cryptorchid Canadian pony was admitted for castration. The left testis was in the scrotum, but neither the right testis nor the right epididymis could be located by external palpation of the right inguinal canal. The proposed treatment was laparoscopic cryptorchidectomy with pony standing in stock. With a long-handled forceps inserted into the abdominal cavity, the testis cord is gently grasped and moderate traction without success in bringing the testicle into the abdomen - retained testis. After the failure of laparascopic cryptorchidectomy but having an exact diagnosis - partial abdominal unilaterally cryptorchidism, we have proceeded to open cryptorchidectomy via inguinal approach with pony anesthetized and positioned in dorsal recumbency. Results: This case report reveals that the major disadvantage of the cryptorchidectomy by flank approach is the inability to remove an inguinally retained testis. Conclusion: If the location of the testis is unknown, the standing laparoscopic diagnose can be decisive. Cryptorchidectomy via inguinal approach and noninvasive method for identifying and everting the vaginal process by traction of the inguinal extension of the gubernaculum testis are commonly facile procedure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| 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 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".