A Novel Visual Grading for Ureteral Encrusted Stent Classification to Help Decide the Endourologic Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the study is to propose a visual classification for encrusted stents (ESs) to help choose the appropriate endourologic treatment. Materials and Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, and descriptive study was performed. A total of 140 patients with encrusted Double-J stents were enrolled from 5 different institutions. The novel visual grading for ureteral encrusted stent (V-GUES) classification system ranges from A to D, increasing with severity of encrustation. Results: ESs could be removed with a single intervention in 112 patients (86.8%). Type A and B ESs could be removed in all patients (100% success). Type D stents had minor retrieval and stone-free rates ( p = 0.006 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Flexible ureteroscopy had a low success rate (77.7%) for type C stents (odds ratio [OR]: 0.21). Combined access had a 100% success rate for retrieval of type C ESs and a 92.9% success rate for type D ESs (OR: 9.18). Type D stents were associated with patients requiring more than one session to retrieve the stent (OR: 0.11) and stones (OR: 0.21). Conclusions: The V-GUES system is associated with treatment success rates of ES retrieval and stone-free status. It is also associated with the complication rate and the number of sessions needed for patients to be stent and stone free. The V-GUES classification could help counsel patients about the best treatment options and their outcomes. Further prospective studies will be needed to provide external validation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".