Pelvic Fracture Urethral Injury in Females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Pelvic fracture urethral injuries (PFUI) in females are very rare. The available literature on the management of this condition is scarce and not clear, mainly because of limited experience among reconstructive surgeons. We present our experience of management of these complex urethral injuries in female patients. Materials and Methods We collected data, retrospectively and prospectively for 22 female patients referred to our center for PFUI repair between 1995 and 2021. During the clinical assessment of these complex injuries, following our internal institutional protocol, all patients underwent pelvic MRI (bladder and urethra are filled with saline solution and jelly to enhance the urethral lumen and the level of the distraction) before anastomotic urethroplasty. Results PFUI compromised the mid urethra in 10 patients (45.5%). A transabdominal approach was used in 8 patients (80%), and urethra-vaginal fistula repair was undertaken in 6 patients (60%). After a median follow-up of 36 months, only 1 patient with proximal PFUI required a surgical revision without compromising urinary continence. Conclusions The most common site of urethral involvement in pelvic fracture is mid urethral, which is owing to avulsion. Urethra-vaginal fistula should be suspected. Treatment consists in anastomotic urethroplasty, mainly through the abdominal approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".