MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MP79-06 COMPARISON OF NEPHROSTOMY TECHNIQUES IN THE PORCINE KIDNEY: RETROGRADE LASER ENDOSCOPIC X-RAY-GUIDED INTRARENAL TRACT (LEXIT) VERSUS RETROGRADE LAWSON ROCKET WIRE ACCESS VERSUS STANDARD NEPHROSTOMY NEEDLE ANTEGRADE ACCESS

2019· article· en· W2940795953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kamaljot S. Kaler, Vinay Cooper, Mitchell O’Leary, Zachary A. Valley, Thomas Lee, Roshan M. Patel, Jaime Landman, Ralph V. Clayman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous nephrostomyNephrostomySurgeryPercutaneousUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Surgical Therapy VI (MP79)1 Apr 2019MP79-06 COMPARISON OF NEPHROSTOMY TECHNIQUES IN THE PORCINE KIDNEY: RETROGRADE LASER ENDOSCOPIC X-RAY-GUIDED INTRARENAL TRACT (LEXIT) VERSUS RETROGRADE LAWSON ROCKET WIRE ACCESS VERSUS STANDARD NEPHROSTOMY NEEDLE ANTEGRADE ACCESS Kamaljot Kaler*, Vinay Cooper, Mitchell O'Leary, Zachary Valley, Thomas Lee, Roshan Patel, Jaime Landman, and Ralph Clayman Kamaljot Kaler*Kamaljot Kaler* More articles by this author , Vinay CooperVinay Cooper More articles by this author , Mitchell O'LearyMitchell O'Leary More articles by this author , Zachary ValleyZachary Valley More articles by this author , Thomas LeeThomas Lee More articles by this author , Roshan PatelRoshan Patel More articles by this author , Jaime LandmanJaime Landman More articles by this author , and Ralph ClaymanRalph Clayman More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000557358.67766.baAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Laser Endoscopic X-ray-guided Intrarenal Tract (LEXIT) is a recently described retrograde access technique for creating a percutaneous nephrostomy using the Holmium laser. Herein, we compared the feasibility and safety of LEXIT with the retrograde Lawson rocket wire technique and standard antegrade 18-gauge nephrostomy needle access in a porcine kidney. METHODS: Seven pigs underwent nephrostomy accesses with simultaneous laparoscopic vision at 5 mmHg pressure. For each kidney, the aforementioned three access methods were randomized. The following data were collected: access time, bleeding severity (Scale: 1=no bleeding – 10=severe bleeding), bleeding duration, calyceal point of entry, and surgeon comfort with the technique (Scale: 1=very easy - 10=very difficult). Analysis of variance was performed to examine the differences among the 3 access methods. RESULTS: A total of 73 accesses were completed with an average of five nephrostomy tracts per kidney. The LEXIT access time was significantly faster than the nephrostomy needle or Lawson puncture wire (8.4, 63, 21 seconds (s), respectively, p<0.002). Bleeding intensity and duration were significantly lower with the Lawson wire (0.0, 0.0 s), versus LEXIT (2.1, 58.6 s) and the nephrostomy needle (3.4, 110.5 s) (Table 1). LEXIT was rated as in the easiest method for acquiring access within all calyces: upper pole (p=0.003), interpolar calyces (p<0.001), and lower pole (p<0.006) (Table 2). CONCLUSIONS: In the in vivo porcine kidney, endoscopic-guided retrograde holmium Laser Endoscopic X-ray-guided Intrarenal Tract (LEXIT) creation provided the fastest access times and greatest ease of access to the upper and interpolar calyces. Bleeding during LEXIT was significantly less than standard antegrade nephrostomy needle access. Source of Funding: none Calgary, Canada; Orange, CA© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e1153-e1154 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Kamaljot Kaler* More articles by this author Vinay Cooper More articles by this author Mitchell O'Leary More articles by this author Zachary Valley More articles by this author Thomas Lee More articles by this author Roshan Patel More articles by this author Jaime Landman More articles by this author Ralph Clayman More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.004

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicPediatric Urology and Nephrology StudiesFrench-language works237,207