Transverse Lumbotomy for Open Partial/Radical Nephrectomy: How I Do It
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Conventional open surgical techniques allow proper surgical management for renal malignancies but have their intrinsic drawbacks. The aim of this paper is to present our technique in minimal renal exposure while avoiding the intrinsic complications of conventional techniques. METHODS: We described our technique, which can be easily understood and replicated by urologists performing open kidney surgery. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients had this technique done safely over the last 4 years, and 3 patients had this exposure changed into intraperitoneal extended wound for very large upper pole tumours. The median operating time was 70 min. No single patient required intraoperative blood transfusion. Median warm ischemic time was 9 min. CONCLUSION: Transverse lumbotomy is a safe reproducible technique that allows proper kidney exposure through a relatively smaller wound and avoiding unnecessary auxiliary techniques as rib resection, pleural tear management, and intraperitoneal exposure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".