MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206076432 · doi:10.3390/medicina58010123

Risk Factors for Urological Complications Associated with Caesarean Section—A Case-Control Study

2022· article· en· W4206076432 on OpenAlexaff
Viorel Dragoş Radu, Anda Pristavu, Angela Vinturache, Pavel Onofrei, Demetra Socolov, Alexandru Cărăuleanu, Lucian Vasile Boiculese, Sadyie Ioana Scripcariu, Radu Cristian Costache

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCaesarean sectionIncidence (geometry)Univariate analysisObstetricsPopulationMedical recordPlacenta accretaBladder injuryPregnancyGynecologySurgeryMultivariate analysisFetusInternal medicinePlacenta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Acute urologic complications, including bladder and/or ureteric injury, are rare but known events occurring at the time of caesarean section (CS). Delayed or inadequate management is associated with increased morbidity and poor long-term outcomes. We conducted this study to identify the risk factors for urologic injuries at CS in order to inform obstetricians and patients of the risks and allow management planning to mitigate these risks. Materials and Methods: We reviewed all cases of urological injuries that occurred at CS surgeries in a tertiary university centre over a period of four years, from January 2016 to December 2019. To assess the risk factors of urologic injuries, a case-control study of women undergoing caesarean delivery was designed, matched 1:3 to randomly selected women who had an uncomplicated CS. Electronic medical records and operative reports were reviewed for socio-demographic and clinical information. Descriptive and univariate analyses were used to characterize the study population and identify the risk factors for urologic complications. Results: There were 36 patients with urologic complications out of 14,340 CS patients, with an incidence of 0.25%. The patients in the case group were older, had a lower gestational age at time of delivery and their newborns had a lower birth weight. Prior CS was more prevalent among the study group (88.2 vs. 66.7%), as was the incidence of placenta accreta and central praevia. In comparison with the control group, the intraoperative blood loss was higher in the case group, although there was no difference among the two groups regarding the type of surgery (emergency vs. elective), uterine rupture, or other obstetrical indications for CS. Prior CS and caesarean hysterectomy were risk factors for urologic injuries at CS. Conclusions: The major risk factor for urological injuries at the time of CS surgery is prior CS. Among patients with previous CS, those who undergo caesarean hysterectomy for placenta previa central and placenta accreta are at higher risk of surgical haemostasis and complex urologic injuries involving the bladder and the ureters.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinaSame topicMaternal and fetal healthcareFrench-language works237,207