MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283708800 · doi:10.1177/1098612x221107795

Use of tetrasodium EDTA acid for the treatment of intraluminal obstruction of subcutaneous ureteral bypass devices

2022· article· en· W4283708800 on OpenAlexaff
Valérie Duval, Marilyn Dunn, Catherine Vachon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUreterRenal pelvisUrinary tract obstructionNephrostomyTolerabilitySurgeryUrologyUrinary systemCystostomyUltrasoundSalinePercutaneousRadiologyAnesthesiaInternal medicineAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a 4% tetrasodium EDTA (tEDTA) infusion protocol in the subcutaneous ureteral bypass (SUB) devices of cats with intraluminal obstruction at a veterinary teaching hospital between July 2017 and April 2020. METHODS: This was a retrospective controlled study. Cats with an obstructed SUB device underwent a 4% tEDTA infusion protocol. Obstruction of the device was diagnosed based on renal pelvic dilation, dilatation of the ureter, mineralized material within the device (cystostomy or nephrostomy catheters) seen on ultrasound, the absence of visible bubbles within the renal pelvis and/or urinary bladder following ultrasound-guided flushing of the device with saline. RESULTS: A total of 16 tEDTA infusion protocols were performed in 14 cats. The infusion protocol was considered successful in 11/16 SUB devices (68.8%). Six devices (n = 6/11; 54.5%) had recurrence of obstruction with a median time of 87 days. One or more episodes of self-limiting pollakiuria and/or hematuria following infusion was seen in eight patients (n = 8/14; 57.1%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Infusions of 4% tEDTA successfully relieved intraluminal obstruction in patients with occluded SUB devices; however, the recurrence of obstruction was common. Additional studies evaluating case selection and optimal protocols are warranted.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Feline Medicine and SurgerySame topicVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207