MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127709993 · doi:10.1089/end.2020.1133

Risk Factors for Urosepsis After Ureteroscopy for Stone Disease: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3127709993 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endourology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioUreteroscopyMeta-analysisInternal medicineSurgeryConfidence intervalRisk factorRelative riskStentUreter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Urosepsis is a serious potential complication of ureteroscopic procedures for stone disease, yet the risk factors for this complication are not well characterized. The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to identify potential risk factors for urosepsis after ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease. Materials and Methods: We performed systematic searches of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting at least one prospectively defined risk factor for urosepsis after URS. Studies that only reported rates of isolated fever, urinary tract infection (UTI), or pooled infectious complications were excluded. The risk factors evaluated in this review were age, sex, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, recent UTI, pyuria, hydronephrosis, stone history, stone size, preoperative stent placement, preoperative positive urine culture, and procedure time. A random effects meta-analysis model with inverse variance weighting was used where the statistic of interest was the odds ratio for dichotomous variables and the mean difference for continuous outcomes. Results: In 13 studies (5 prospective) with 5597 patients, the pooled incidence of postoperative urosepsis was 5.0% (95% confidence interval: 2.4–8.2). Six risk factors were statistically associated with increased postoperative urosepsis risk—preoperative stent placement (odds ratio = 3.94, p < 0.001, 6 studies), positive preoperative urine culture (odds ratio = 3.56, p < 0.001, 6 studies), ischemic heart disease (odds ratio = 2.49, p = 0.002, 2 studies), older age (mean difference = 2.7 years, p = 0.002, 6 studies), longer procedure time (mean difference = 9 minutes, p = 0.02, 1 study), and diabetes mellitus (odds ratio = 2.04, p = 0.04, 6 studies). Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that among patients undergoing URS for treatment of stone disease, the risk of postoperative urosepsis was 5.0%. Older age, diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, preoperative stent placement, a positive urine culture, and longer procedure time were associated with increased postoperative urosepsis risk. These results will assist urologists with preoperative risk stratification before ureteroscopic procedures.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.015
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.304 · 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