Conservative treatment of upper urinary tract carcinoma: Long-term results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We sought to assess the long-term results of conservative treatment for upper urinary tract carcinoma (UUTC) with regard to tumour recurrence and preservation of renal unit. METHODS: From October 1987 to January 2014, 65 patients (median age 68 years) were diagnosed with UUTC and underwent endoscopic and open surgical techniques. Thirteen patients had bilateral disease and one had a single kidney. The primary approach was endoscopic in 37 reno-ureteral units (20 percutaneous resections, 17 ureteroscopies ). Open surgery was performed in 19 cases. A total of 20 patients received mitomycin C. RESULTS: Superficial stage pTa or T1 was noted in 37 patients, infiltrating stage pT2 and pT3 in seven and inverted papilloma in one. The stage of the tumour was impossible to classify in 20. With a median followup of 75.12 months (interquartile range [IQR] 144.71-17.41), the kidney preservation, recurrence, specific survival, and global survival rates were 78.5% (51/65), 40.0% (26/65), 92.3% (60/65), and 69.2% (45/65), respectively. From the patients who had recurrence, 15 were salvaged with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). The bladder tumour recurrence rate after the surgery was 30.76% (20/65). At the end of the followup, five patients had died of UUTC progression and 16 from other causes. Postoperative complications included one case of fistula, one case of stricture, and one case of nephrectomy due to bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: In selected cases, conservative management is a safe and feasible alternative to RNU, with the advantage of renal unit preservation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".