Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Objectives: Orthotopic continent urinary diversion (OCUD) after radical cystectomy (RC) may predispose to a higher rate of complications than ileal conduit urinary diversion (ICUD).Methods: We identified all OCUD and ICUD patients in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS).We tabulated intraoperative and in-hospital complications, transfusion, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality rates according to urinary diversion.Multivariable analyses were performed, with adjustment for age, Charlson comorbidity Index (CCI), gender, race, hospital type and region, annual hospital volume tertiles, and year of surgery.Results: The rate of OCUD was 8% vs. 92% for ICUD.Intraoperative and in-hospital complication rates were 2.5% vs. 2.6% (p=0.8) and 24.7% vs. 28.1% (p=0.04) for OCUD and ICUD patients, respectively.Blood transfusions were administered in 17.9% vs. 26.7%(p<0.001).Length of stay above median (≥9 days) was recorded in 53.5% vs. 54.9%(p=0.4).In-hospital mortality was 0.4% vs. 2.5% (p<0.001).After adjusting for all covariates, OCUD patients were less likely to receive a blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR]: 0.7, p<0.001), more likely to have an increased length of stay (OR: 1.3, p=0.002), and less likely to succumb to in-hospital mortality (OR: 0.3, p=0.03) relative to ICUD patients.Urinary diversion failed to achieve statistical significance for intraoperative (OR: 1.0, p=0.9) and in-hospital complications (OR: 1.0, p=0.8).Conclusions: After RC, urinary diversion dictates no difference in intraoperative or in-hospital complications.However, fewer transfusions and a lower in-hospital mortality rate were recorded in OCUD patients.Therefore, broader use of OCUD after RC should be encouraged.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.805 | 0.628 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".