MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321381316 · doi:10.1016/j.euros.2023.01.009

Ileal Conduit Versus Orthotopic Neobladder Urinary Diversion in Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from a Multi-institutional Series

2023· article· en· W4321381316 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Tappero, Paolo Dell’Oglio, Maria Angela Cerruto, Rafael Salas, Oscar Buisan Rueda, Giuseppe Simone, Kees Hendricksen, Francesco Soria, Paolo Umari, Alessandro Antonelli, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi, Ottavio De Cobelli, Carlo Terrone, Antonio Galfano, Marco Moschini, Ettore Di Trapani

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Open Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystectomyMedicineUrinary diversionBladder cancerLogistic regressionUrologySurgeryOdds ratioInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Head-to-head comparisons between ileal conduit (IC) and orthotopic neobladder (ONB) in terms of peri- and postoperative outcomes and complications, in the specific setting of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), are not available. To address the impact of the type of urinary diversion (UD, IC vs ONB) on RARC morbidity, as well as operative time (OT), length of stay (LOS), and readmissions. Urothelial bladder cancer patients treated with RARC at nine high-volume European institutions between 2008 and 2020 were identified. RARC with either IC or ONB. Intra- and postoperative complications were collected and reported according to the Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards recommendations and European Association of Urology guidelines, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models tested the impact of UD on outcomes, after adjustment for clustering at single hospital level. Overall, 555 nonmetastatic RARC patients were identified. In 280 (51%) and 275 (49%) patients, an IC and an ONB were performed, respectively. Eighteen intraoperative complications were recorded. The rates of intraoperative complications were 4% in IC patients and 3% in ONB patients (p = 0.4). The median LOS and readmission rates were 10 versus 12 d (p < 0.001) and 20% versus 21% (p = 0.8) in IC versus ONB patients, respectively. At a multivariable logistic regression analyses, the type of UD (IC vs ONB) reached the independent predictor status for prolonged OT (odds ratio [OR]: 0.61, p = 0.03) and prolonged LOS (OR: 0.34, p < 0.001), but not for readmission (OR: 0.92, p = 0.7). Overall, 513 postoperative complications were experienced by 324 patients (58%). At least one postoperative complication was experienced by 160 (57%) IC patients versus 164 (60%) ONB patients (p = 0.6). The type of UD reached the status of an independent predictor of UD-related complications (OR: 0.64, p = 0.03). Compared with RARC with ONB, RARC with IC is less prone to UD-related postoperative complications, prolonged OT, and prolonged LOS. To date, the impact of the type of urinary diversion, namely, ileal conduit versus orthotopic neobladder, on peri- and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy is unknown. Based on a rigorous data accrual, which relied on established complication reporting systems (Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards and European Association of Urology recommended systems), we reported intra- and postoperative complications according to urinary diversion type. Moreover, we found that ileal conduit was associated with lower operative time and length of stay, and yielded a protective effect in terms of urinary diversion–related complications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Urology Open ScienceSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207