MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293115814 · doi:10.22374/jeleu.v5i2.140

Successful Simultaneous Clearance of Bilateral Staghorn Stones with Flexible Uretero-Renoscopic Lasertripsy

2022· article· en· W4293115814 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmed Kodera, Tara Burnhope, Vincent Koo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endoluminal Endourology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClearanceSurgeryStaghorn calculusUrologyPercutaneous nephrolithotomyPercutaneous

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 50-year-old tetraplegic gentleman was referred with visible haematuria and recurrent urinary tract infections (UTI) presenting as behavioural difficulty. His past medical history includes diffuse brain injury following a motorbike accident, hypertension, BMI 41, performance status 4, and needing a hoist for transfer. CT showed bilateral staghorn complete calculi measuring the maximum length of 3 cm (left) and 4.2 cm (right) with 600 HU. Following best interest meetings, the patient communicated his unwillingness to proceed with PCNL or open surgery due to risks and opted for FURS. His bilateral staghorn stone was completely cleared simultaneously at his primary procedure after a total operative time of 190 min. He had no postoperative complications and was discharged with bilateral stents in situ. He had a second-look FURS 4 weeks later but only required washout of minimal dust and removal of bilateral ureteric stents. His stone analysis confirmed struvite stone. His haematuria, recurrent UTIs, and behavioural issues were resolved. His 6 months postoperative CTKUB showed a dust-free status. This report discusses the challenges of simultaneous bilateral staghorn clearance using FURS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endoluminal EndourologySame topicPediatric Urology and Nephrology StudiesFrench-language works237,207