Single-Port Laparoscopic Treatment and Outcome of Dogs with Ovarian Remnant Syndrome: 13 Cases (2010–2018)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Ovarian remnant syndrome (ORS) is a condition resulting from incomplete removal of ovarian tissue during ovariectomy and/or ovariohysterectomy. Single-port laparoscopy (SPL) is an alternative to ventral midline laparotomy for treatment of ORS. Medical records of 13 client-owned female dogs who underwent SPL for the treatment of ORS were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate surgical technique and outcome. Dogs who had undergone a previous attempt at open ovariectomy or ovariohysterectomy were included. Major intraoperative complications did not occur and conversion to open laparotomy was not required. In 1 dog, an SPL + 1 technique was used, in which an additional port was placed cranial to the single-port device to aid in dissection and tissue manipulation. Median surgical time was 45 min (range, 30–90 min). Clinical signs related to estrus had resolved in 11 of 13 dogs with a median follow-up time of 18 mo. Two of 13 dogs were lost to follow-up at 3 mo postoperatively; however, signs of estrus had resolved at time of last follow-up. SPL treatment for ORS was feasible and successful in this cohort of dogs. Reduced surgical time was found in this study compared with previous reports investigating multiple-port laparoscopic treatment of ORS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".