MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901898332 · doi:10.1155/2018/9137892

The Benefits of Using a Small Caliber Ureteroscope in Evaluation and Management of Urethral Stricture

2018· article· en· W2901898332 on OpenAlexaffabout
Walid Shahrour, Pankaj Joshi, Craig Hunter, Vikram Batra, Hazem Elmansy, Sandesh Surana, Sanjay Kulkarni

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Urology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsURETEROSCOPEMedicineUrethral strictureCaliberSurgeryUrethraEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The proper evaluation of urethral strictures is an essential part of the surgical planning in urethral reconstruction. The proper evaluation of the stricture can be challenging in certain situations, especially when the meatus is involved. We propose that the use of a small caliber ureteroscope (4.5 Fr and 6.5 Fr) can offer additional help and use for the surgical planning in urethroplasty. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on 76 patients who underwent urethroplasties in Kulkarni Reconstructive Urology Center, Pune, India and Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Center, Thunder Bay, Canada. Patients had retrograde and micturition urethrograms performed preoperatively. The stricture was assessed visually using a 6.5 Fr ureteroscope. If the stricture was smaller than 6.5 Fr, we attempted using the 4.5 Fr ureteroscope. In nonobliterated strictures, we attempted bypassing the stricture making sure not to dilate the stricture. A glide wire would be passed to the bladder under vision. Stricture length, tissue quality, presence of other proximal strictures, false passages, and bladder tumors or stones would be assessed visually. If the penile stricture was near obliterative (smaller than 4.5 Fr caliber), a two-staged procedure is elected to be performed. For proximal bulbar strictures, if the urethral caliber is less than 4.5 Fr and the stricture length is less than 1 cm, we perform a nontransecting anastomotic urethroplasty (NTAU). If the stricture length is >1 cm, we perform a double-face augmented urethroplasty (DFAU). If the urethral caliber is >4.5 Fr and particularly those who are sexually active, ventral inlay with buccal mucosal grafts (BMGs) is performed. In mid to distal bulbar strictures, if the urethral caliber is >4.5 Fr, our procedure of choice is dorsal onlay with BMG. For those with urethral caliber <4.5 Fr and a stricture less than 1 cm, we perform a NTAU. For strictures longer than 1 cm, we perform a DFAU. With the exception of trauma, we very rarely transect the urethra. For panurethral strictures, we almost exclusively perform Kulkarni one-sided dissection. RESULTS: Urethroscopy was performed in 76 patients who presented for urethroplasty from July 2014 to September 2014 (in Pune) and between April 2016 and September 2017 (in Thunder Bay). Bypassing the stricture was achieved in 68 patients (89%) while it was unsuccessful in 8 patients (11%). In all unsuccessful urethroscopies, the stricture was near obliterative <4.5 Fr. Our surgical planning changed in (13) 17% of the cases. Out of 43 bulbar strictures, the decision was changed in (9) 21% where we performed 4 DFAU, 3 AAU (augmented anastomotic urethroplasty), and 2 EAU (end anastomotic urethroplasty). In 13 penile strictures, we opted for staged urethroplasty including 3 Johansons and 1 first-stage Asopa in 30.7%. In 20 panurethral urethroplasties, 1 patient (5%) had a urethral stone found in a proximal portion of the bulbar urethra distal to a stricture ring that was removed using an endoscopic grasper. CONCLUSION: The use of the small caliber ureteroscope can help in evaluation of the stricture caliber, length, and tissue quality. The scope can also aid in placing a guide wire, evaluating the posterior urethra, and screening for urethral or bladder stones. It can also improve the preoperative patient counselling and avoid unwanted surprises.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in UrologySame topicUrological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207