The Morbidity of Ureteral Strictures in Patients with Prior Ureteroscopic Stone Surgery: Multi-Institutional Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Nephrolithiasis is an increasingly common ailment in the United States. Ureteroscopic management has supplanted shockwave lithotripsy as the most common treatment of upper tract stone disease. Ureteral stricture is a rare but serious complication of stone disease and its management. The impact of new technologies and more widespread ureteroscopic management on stricture rates is unknown. We describe our experience in managing strictures incurred following ureteroscopy for upper tract stone disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records for patients managed at four tertiary care centers between December 2006 and October 2015 with the diagnosis of ureteral stricture following ureteroscopy for upper tract stone disease were retrospectively reviewed. Study outcomes included number and type (endoscopic, reconstructive, or nephrectomy) of procedures required to manage stricture. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients with 40 ureteral strictures following URS for upper tract stone disease were identified. Thirty-five percent of patients had hydronephrosis or known stone impaction at the time of initial URS, and 20% of cases had known ureteral perforation at the time of initial URS. After stricture diagnosis, the mean number of procedures requiring sedation or general anesthesia performed for stricture management was 3.3 ± 1.8 (range 1-10). Eleven strictures (27.5%) were successfully managed with endoscopic techniques alone, 37.5% underwent reconstruction, 10% had a chronic stent/nephrostomy, and 10 (25%) required nephrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical morbidity of ureteral strictures incurred following ureteroscopy for stone disease can be severe, with a low success rate of endoscopic management and a high procedural burden that may lead to nephrectomy. Further studies that assess specific technical risk factors for ureteral stricture following URS are needed.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".