Safety and Efficacy of Simultaneous Bilateral Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A retrospective review was conducted to evaluate intraoperative and patient outcomes following simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SB-PCNL). Target stone characteristics, operative time, hospitalization length, post-operative complications, blood loss, opioid use, pain, and stone-free rates were evaluated. In total, 42 patients with large renal stones (>20 mm2) were identified for this study, and 38% of them achieved stone-free status with no residual fragments apparent on post-operative day one CT imaging. The maximum mean residual fragment size was 3.67 mm2 and average number of residual fragments following the procedures was 1.63. The rates of blood loss, post-operative complications, opioid use, and pain from the study cohort were similar to the reported outcomes of studies conducted by others. The potential benefits of a single procedure and anesthesia to treat bilateral stone burdens, lower total pain medication prescribed, and lower hospital costs render SB-PCNL as an attractive option in the treatment of bilateral kidney stones.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".