MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200465647 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004541

Retrograde Bladder Filling After Outpatient Gynecologic Surgery

2021· review· en· W3200465647 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Thiel, Siddhi Mathur, Andrew Zakhari, John Matelski, Chris Walsh, Ally Murji

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUreteral procedures and complications
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryRelative riskSurgeryUrinary systemHysterectomyUrinary retentionConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing postoperative bladder retrofilling to passive filling after outpatient gynecologic surgery to evaluate effects on postoperative outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1947 to August 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers screened 1,465 articles. We included RCTs that compared postoperative bladder retrofilling to passive filling in patients who underwent outpatient gynecologic surgery by any approach. The primary outcome was the time to first void. Secondary outcomes included time to discharge, postoperative urinary retention, urinary tract infection, and patient satisfaction. Mean differences and relative risks (RRs) were calculated for the meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We included eight studies with 1,173 patients. Bladder retrofilling in the operating room resulted in a significant decrease in the time to first void (mean difference -33.5 minutes; 95% CI -49.1 to -17.9, 4 studies, 403 patients) and time to discharge (mean difference -32.0 minutes; 95% CI -51.5 to -12.6, eight studies, 1,164 patients). Bladder retrofilling did not shorten time to discharge when performed in the postanesthetic care unit (mean difference -14.8 min; 95% CI -62.6 to 32.9, three studies, 258 patients) or after laparoscopic hysterectomy (mean difference -26.0 min; 95% CI -56.5 to 4.5, five studies, 657 patients). There were no differences in postoperative urinary retention (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.45-1.30, five studies, 910 patients) or risk of urinary tract infection between the retrofill and passive fill groups (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.14-1.77, four studies, 387 patients). Patient satisfaction was comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Retrofilling the bladder in the operating room after outpatient gynecologic surgery modestly reduces the time to first void and discharge with no increase in adverse events. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42020203692.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicUreteral procedures and complicationsFrench-language works237,207