Pediatric bladder augmentation – Panacea or Pandora’s box?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bladder augmentation is a surgery that can increase bladder capacity and compliance. The objective of this study was to provide a longitudinal review of pediatric bladder augmentation at a tertiary Canadian center. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent bladder augmentation at a tertiary pediatric hospital between 1986 and 2014. The primary objective was short- and long-term complications of augmentation. Secondary objectives were to review number of augmentation procedures performed over time and the utility of routine postoperative cystograms. RESULTS: A total of 56 procedures were performed on 54 patients (28 males, 26 females) of mean age 10 years (standard deviation [SD] 5) and mean followup eight years (SD 5). The most common bowel segment used was ileum (87.5%). Twenty-eight patients (50%) received catheterizable channels. Overall complication rate was 15% and the most common complications were urinary tract infections (68.5%), worsening hydronephrosis (14.8%), bladder stone formation (14%), and hematuria (13%). In total, 19 of 54 (35.2%) patients returned to the operating room. The incidence of bladder perforation was 3.6%. Complications with the catheterizable channel occurred in 13 of 28 (46.4%), of which 10 were related to stomal stenosis. Forty patients had postoperative cystograms and extravasation was seen in three (7.5%). There was no malignancy during the followup. Only four augmentations were performed from 2008-2014. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder augmentation likely represents a safe surgical treatment option. Extravasation on postoperative cystogram was uncommon and, thus, it may not be indicated routinely. The number of augmentation procedures performed has declined in recent years.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".