MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802619689 · doi:10.1111/bju.14360

WATER II (80–150 mL) procedural outcomes

2018· article· en· W2802619689 on OpenAlexaff
Mihir Desai, Mo Bidair, Naeem Bhojani, Andrew Trainer, Andrew Arther, Eugene V. Kramolowsky, Leo Doumanian, Dean Elterman, Ronald P. Kaufman, James E. Lingeman, Amy E. Krambeck, Gregg Eure, Gopal Badlani, Mark Plante, Edward Uchio, Greg Gin, Larry Goldenberg, Ryan F. Paterson, Alan So, Mitch Humphreys, Claus Roehrborn, Steven A. Kaplan, Jay Motola, Kevin C. Zorn

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health NetworkUniversité de Montréal
FundersPROCEPT BioRobotics
KeywordsMedicineProstateSurgeryAdverse effectFoley catheterProspective cohort studyBalloonInternational Prostate Symptom ScorePerioperativeCatheterLower urinary tract symptomsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To present early safety and feasibility data from a multicentre prospective study (WATER II) of aquablation in the treatment of symptomatic men with large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Between September and December 2017, 101 men with moderate-to-severe BPH symptoms and prostate volume of 80-150 mL underwent aquablation in a prospective multicentre international clinical trial. Baseline demographics and standardized postoperative management variables were carefully recorded in a central independently monitored database. Surgeons answered analogue scale questionnaires on intra-operative technical factors and postoperative management. Adverse events up to 1 month were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee. RESULTS: The mean (range) prostate volume was 107 (80-150) mL. The mean (range) operating time was 37 (15-97) min and aquablation resection time was 8 (3-15) min. Adequate adenoma resection was achieved with a single pass in 34 patients and with additional passes in 67 patients (mean 1.8 treatment passes), all in a single operating session. Haemostasis was achieved using either a Foley balloon catheter placed in the bladder under traction (n = 98, mean duration 18 h) or direct tamponade using a balloon inflated in the prostate fossa (n = 3, mean duration 15 h). No patient required electrocautery for haemostasis at the time of the primary procedure. The mean length of stay after the procedure was 1.6 days (range same day to 6 days). The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2 event rate observed at 1 month was 29.7%. Bleeding complications were recorded in 10 patients (9.9%) during the index procedure hospitalization prior to discharge, and included six (5.9%) peri-operative transfusions. CONCLUSIONS: Aquablation is feasible and safe in treating men with men with large prostates (80-150 mL). The 6-month efficacy data are being accrued and will be presented in future publications (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03123250).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207