MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Caudal Lumbar Splanchnic Nerves Provide Primary Control of the Porcine Bladder Neck

2019· article· en· W3095345295 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam M.R. Groh, Brian L. Allman, Nicholas Power, Tyler S. Beveridge

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineHypogastric nerveNeck of urinary bladderAnatomyLumbar plexusLumbarSurgeryUrinary bladderStimulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Functional infertility caused by retrograde ejaculation (RE) is the most significant postoperative complication following surgery for advanced stage testis cancer. This occurs because of iatrogenic injury to the sympathetic nerves of the aortic‐ and superior hypogastric plexuses in control of internal urethral sphincter (IUS) contraction, thus impairing bladder neck closure. Despite recent advancements in our anatomical understanding of these plexuses to inform nerve‐sparing surgical technique, complete preservation of all nerves is not always possible due to the extent of some cancers. As such, the most effective approach would spare only the nerves required to prevent RE (i.e., the sympathetic innervation to the bladder neck). However, the relative contribution of the nerves comprising the the aortic plexus — the intermesenteric nerves (IMN) and caudal‐most lumbar splanchnic nerves (LSN) — in control of bladder neck closure remain unknown, thus directed nerve‐sparing cannot be yet be achieved. Aim To investigate the contribution of the IMNs and LSNs in bladder neck closure. Method Using a translational porcine model that has been shown to have homology to the human aortic plexus, the first objective evaluated the role of the contributing nerves (the IMN & LSN) in IUS contraction compared to the hypogastric nerves (HN; homologous to the human superior hypogastric plexus). For the second objective , we determined the arrangement of the fibers supplying the IUS within the ipsilateral and contralateral HNs. To achieve this, we measured IUS contraction following electrostimulation [10Hz, 30mA, 1ms pulse width, 200V, 30s] of the (1) HN, (2) LSN, and (3) IMN in an intact state (Obj #1) and following an ipsilateral HN lesion to test if relevant axons decussate proximal to the HNs (Obj #2) in three boars (85.6 ± 6.4 kg). Direct electrostimulation was performed using a bipolar electrode, and the resultant contraction was monitored using a pressure‐sensing balloon catheter. Results Importantly, the average IUS contraction following LSN stimulation was approximately 3.5 fold greater (157.3 ± 79.7 mmHg□s) than the ipsilateral IMN stimulation (44.0 ± 70.2 mmHg□s; p<0.05). Moreover, ipsilateral LSN stimulation produced an average IUS contraction integral that rivaled the maximal response generated by ipsilateral HN stimulation (82.1% of total; 193.4 ± 107.9 mmHg□s; p>0.05). Lastly, a lesion to the ipsilateral HN significantly reduced (in some cases, abolished) the response (87.2% reduction; 13.8 ± 14.2 mmHg□s; p<0.05) indicating minimal decussation of fibers at the level of the aortic plexus. Conclusion These data demonstrate that the most caudal LSNs provide the majority of sympathetic innervation to the IUS in comparison to the IMNs. In addition, few fibers within the LSNs pass contralaterally, but rather continue through an ipsilateral HN to supply the bladder neck. These findings position the LSNs as major contributors to the maintenance of normal bladder neck function in the boar. Future studies seek to test this hypothesis in retrospective clinical studies to verify the translatability to humans. Support or Funding Information CIHR; LRCP Catalyst; Lawson IRF This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicAnesthesia and Pain Management→French-language works237,207→