MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806325714 · doi:10.1111/iju.13711

Short‐term external ureter stenting shows significant benefit in comparison to routine double‐J stent placement after ureterorenoscopic stone extraction: A prospective randomized trial – the Fast track stent study (Fa<scp>ST</scp>)

2018· article· en· W2806325714 on OpenAlexaff
Peter B. Bach, Alina Reicherz, Joel M.H. Teichman, Lisa Dahlkamp, Nicolas von Landenberg, Rein‐Jueri Palisaar, Joachim Noldus, Christian von Bodman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUreteroscopyUreterStentSurgeryCatheterUrinary systemUrologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether short-term stenting using an external ureter catheter following ureterorenoscopic stone extraction provides a better outcome in comparison to double-J stent ureteral stenting. METHODS: Between August 2014 and August 2015, 141 patients initially managed with a double-J stent insertion were prospectively randomized to ureter catheter for 6 h vs double-J stent insertion for 5 days after stone extraction via ureteroscopy retrograde surgery (including flexible ureteroscopy retrograde surgery) in a single academic center. Endoscopic procedures were performed by nine surgeons. Exclusion criteria were acute urinary tract infection, a solitary kidney, or a stone mass more than 25 mm. Study endpoints were ureter-stent related symptoms and pain assessed by a validated questionnaire (ureteral stent symptom questionnaire) and visual analogue scale before and 4 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: Overall stone-free rate was more than 90%. Mean operative time was 24 min (range 5-63). Groups did not differ in terms of age, body mass index, and stone size. Patients who received short-term ureter catheter showed a significantly higher quality of life. In the ureter catheter group, the urinary index score (16.8 vs 27.8; P < 0.0001), the pain score (9.7 ± 1.3 vs 20.2 ± 1.5; P < 0.0001), and general health index (15.3 ± 0.7 vs 8.5 ± 0.6; P < 0.0001) were significantly lower. Consultation of a physician and antibiotic treatment were rarely needed (1.3 ± 0.1 vs 1.6 ± 0.1; P = 0.017). CONCLUSION: A short-term ureter catheter insertion for 6 h following ureteroscopy retrograde surgery stone removal is a safe procedure and superior to double-J stent insertion with regard to urinary symptoms, pain, quality of life, and stent related symptoms. Patients treated with a short-term ureter catheter recover more quickly, return to work earlier, and need less doctor visits. Most patients would recommend a ureter catheter, and would prefer this strategy in case of future stone treatments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations29
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of UrologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207