Outcomes after transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteronephrectomy for the treatment of primary renal neoplasia in seven dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the perioperative characteristics and outcomes in dogs that underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteronephrectomy (TLU) for primary renal neoplasia. STUDY DESIGN: Short case series. ANIMALS: Seven client-owned dogs. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed and data extracted regarding perioperative characteristics and animal outcomes. TLU was performed using a single-port + 1 or multiple port techniques. Hemostatic clips or a vessel-sealing device were used for occlusion of renal hilar vessels. The ureter was occluded and transected close to the ureterovesicular junction and the tumor was placed in a specimen retrieval bag for extraction from the abdomen. RESULTS: (interquartile range [IQR] 14.76-94.85). Median surgery time for TLU was 90 minutes (IQR 85-105). In one dog, elective conversion to open laparotomy was performed due to large tumor size. Median time to discharge was 31 hours (IQR 24-48). No major perioperative complications occurred and all dogs survived to discharge. Progression free survival in four dogs was 422 days (IQR 119-784). CONCLUSION: TLU was performed for the extirpation of modest sized primary renal tumors with acceptable perioperative outcomes and a low complication rate. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: TLU may be considered for the treatment of selected cases of primary renal neoplasia in dogs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".