Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Urethroplasty remains the most definitive treatment for urethral stricture.Many patients with urethral stricture experience urinary tract infection or have chronic bacteruria.It is unclear if colonization of the urinary tract affects urethroplasty outcomes.The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of a positive preoperative urine culture on urethroplasty complications and outcomes.Methods: A retrospective review of 734 urethroplasties performed by a single surgeon was performed.All patients received preoperative culture sensitive parenteral antibiotics.Positive urine culture was defined as >108 bacteria per ml or in select instances >106 of specific pathogenic bacteria.The effect of a positive urine culture was investigated by examining differences in postoperative wound infection, UTI, and stricture recurrence.Statistical analysis was performed using a Fisher's 2-sided exact test.Results: Overall the rates of wound infection, UTI and stricture recurrence were 4.7%, 4.0% and 8.7% respectively.Comparison between the positive urine culture group and the negative urine culture group revealed a statistically significant difference in the average age of the patients (p=0.0001),but otherwise no statistically significant differences in average stricture length (p=0.9781),revision urethroplasty (p=0.05231) or average co-morbidity score (p=0.1086).Between the positive and negative urine culture groups, the rate of postoperative wound infection were not statistically significant (p=0.5587).Likewise, the rates of postoperative UTI (p=1.000) and stricture recurrence (p=0.2965) were not found to be significantly different with a mean follow-up of 50 months.The specific type of pathogen did not alter the rate of complications.Conclusions: The presence of a positive urine culture with administration of clinically appropriate antimicrobials does not appear to affect urethroplasty complications or outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.088 | 0.010 |
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".