Risk Factors of Infectious Complications after Ureteroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Adjusted Effect Estimate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Multiple studies have reported that gender, pre-operative stent insertion, positive pre-operative urine culture results, and diabetes mellitus are associated with infectious complication after ureteroscopy. A previous meta-analysis focused on this topic is based, however, on crude estimate. Further analysis based on adjusted estimates is needed. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database were searched with ureteroscopy, ureteroscopies, ureteroscopic surgical procedures, ureteroscopic surgery, ureteroscopic lithotripsy, flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy, ureteroscopy (URS), flexible ureterorenoscopy, risk factor, predictor, predicting model, and nomogram until December 15, 2019. The quality of research was evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale system. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of each risk factor were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed with Stata 15.0 software. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2. Publication bias was tested by the Egger test, and funnel plot. Meta-regressions and subgroup analysis were further performed. Results: There were 16 studies; 12,357 patients finally were included in this meta-analysis. The association between gender (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.48–2.23, I2 = 0%, p = 0.701), pre-operative ureteric stent insertion (OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.26–2.91, I2 = 40.4%, p = 0.109), diabetes mellitus (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.07–1.85, I2 = 34.1%, p = 0.168), positive urine culture before URS (OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.34–3.57, I2 = 47.2%, p = 0.092), operation duration (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01–1.04, I2 = 70.6%, p = 0.001) and infectious complications was positively significant. All four pooled results were different from results of meta-analysis based on crude estimate. Conclusion: Female gender, pre-operative ureteric stent insertion, diabetes mellitus, positive urine culture results before URS, and operation duration are risk factors for infectious complications after URS. Meta-analysis based on adjusted estimates may be more convincing.
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 | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.063 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".