MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295915294 · doi:10.23880/whsj-16000122

Adhesiolysis in Women with Chronic Pelvic Pain and a Temporal Resolution of Pain

2018· article· en· W4295915294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dominique Barnes

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Health Science Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePelvic painSurgeryLaparotomyEndometriosisConcomitantAbdominal surgeryLaparoscopyAbdominal painGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Study Objectives: To evaluate the duration of pain improvement after laparoscopic and/or robotic assisted adhesiolysis in women with prior abdominal or pelvic surgeries that have been diagnosed with chronic pelvic pain with suspected pelvic and/or abdominal adhesions. Design: Retrospective Cohort (Canadian Task Force Level II) Setting: Hospital based practice of gynecological surgery and pelvic pain, St. Joseph Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix AZ Patients: Women with prior surgery who underwent laparoscopic or robotic assisted adhesiolysis for chronic pelvic pain secondary to pelvic and/or abdominal adhesions between April 2012-Febuary 2016. Intervention; Adhesiolysis performed via laparoscopic or robotic assisted, defined as 30 minutes or greater of operating time needed to restore normal anatomy. Measurements and Main Results: Eighty-eight women were identified with Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 4410 and 58550 for adhesiolysis. Women > 18 years old who had prior surgery, and symptoms of pelvic pain were included in the study. Women were excluded if they were found to have another source of pelvic pain, malignancy, surgical complications, co-surgery with another specialty, and conversion to laparotomy, and organ resection. The average age at the time of adhesiolysis was 39 years old (range of 19-57). The average number of abdominal surgeries was 1.42 (range 1-4). Fifty-six patients were excluded for concomitant procedures. Thirty-patients patients meet eligibility criteria, of those; seventeen patients had previously undergone at least one adhesiolysis procedure for the treatment of chronic pelvic pain. All 17 of these patients had improvement of their pain. Fourteen of the 17 patients had 2 adhesiolysis procedures with the median length of time between the first and second procedure (improvement in pain after procedure) being 24 months (range of 6-162 months). Three of 14 underwent a third adhesiolysis procedure with the median pain free interval of 24 months. Two of the 3 patients had a fourth adhesiolysis procedure with the average pain free interval being 24 months prior to the 4th procedure. Fifteen of the 32 patients, who underwent their first adhesiolysis treatment, 10 had resolution of pain and 5 patients had a significant improvement of pain. Of this cohort the earliest reported return of pain was 6 months, and the longest total pain free interval was 13 years and 6 months. Conclusion: In patients who present with pelvic pain and prior abdominal or pelvic surgery adhesiolysis may be associated with a temporal improvement of pain.

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)0.012
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen s Health Science JournalSame topicIntestinal and Peritoneal AdhesionsFrench-language works237,207