MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206069497 · doi:10.4293/jsls.2021.00060

Evaluation of the Morbidity of Routine Cystoscopy Performed Intraoperatively During Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomies

2021· article· en· W3206069497 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mélissa Roy, Anne-Sophie Roy, Ian Brochu, Émilie Gorak-Savard, Émilie Hudon, Catherine Tremblay, Chantal Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueJSLS Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUreteral procedures and complications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystoscopyMedicineUrinary systemRetrospective cohort studySurgeryUrinary retentionGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to determine the rate of morbid events (urinary tract infection, hematuria, urinary retention, false positive, incidental finding) associated with routine cystoscopies performed intraoperatively during total laparoscopic hysterectomies (TLH). The secondary objectives are 1) to determine the rate of urinary complications during TLHs in our centers and 2) to determine the detection rate of urinary complications using cystoscopy during TLHs. METHOD: Descriptive retrospective multicenter study. The study took place in Obstetrics & Gynecology departments of 2 university centers in Montreal. Patients underwent a routine cystoscopy during their TLH for a benign reason in our centers. Five hundred thirty-one charts from January 1, 2012 to January 31, 2018 were reviewed. RESULTS: The morbidity rate of routine cystoscopies during TLHs is 4.19% (22/524 cases) in our centers. Our urinary complication rate is 2.45% (13/531 cases). Of these 13 complications, 4 were detected by cystoscopy. CONCLUSION: The usefulness of routine cystoscopies performed intraoperatively during TLHs is questionable due to the number of morbid events and the low rate of urinary trauma in our centers. However, it is hard to establish a direct causality link between certain morbid events and cystoscopy. More studies should be conducted on this subject.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJSLS Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic SurgeonsSame topicUreteral procedures and complicationsFrench-language works237,207