MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365145886 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30040316

Update on Adjustable Trans-Obturator Male System (ATOMS) for Male Incontinence after Prostate Cancer Surgery

2023· review· en· W4365145886 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Téllez, J.J. Szczesniewski, Miguel Vírseda Chamorro, I. Arance, J.C. Angulo

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstateSurgeryUrologyCancerGynecologyGeneral surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: The adjustable trans-obturator male system (ATOMS) is a surgical device developed to treat post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) after prostate cancer treatment. We review the current literature on this anti-incontinence device with the intention of assessing the effectiveness, safety and duration of the silicone-covered scrotal port (SSP) ATOMS, the only generation of the device that is currently available. (2) Material and Methods: Non-systematic literature review is performed. Forty-eight full-text articles are assessed for eligibility. Case reports, expert opinions or commentaries without specific data reported (n = 6), studies with patients who underwent intervention before 2014 (IP or SP ATOMS; n = 10), and studies with incontinence after transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P; n = 2) are excluded for analysis. Thirty studies with SSP ATOMS are included in a qualitative synthesis that incorporates systematic reviews (n = 3), articles partially overlapping with other previously published studies (e.g., follow-up or series updates; n = 9), and studies focusing on specific populations (n = 8). Only articles revealing outcomes of SSP ATOMS were included in the quantitative synthesis of results (n = 10). (3) Results: the pooled data of 1515 patients from the 10 studies with SSP ATOMS confirmed very satisfactory results with this device after adjustment: dry rate: 63–82%, improved rate: 85–100%, complication rate: 7–33%, device infection rate: 2.7–6.2% and explant rate: 0–19%. The durability of the device is reassuring, with 89% of devices in place 5 years after implantation. (4) Conclusion: Despite the absence of randomized controlled studies, the literature findings confirm results of SSP ATOMS appear equivalent to those of artificial urinary sphincters (AUSs) in terms of continence, satisfaction and complications, but with a lower rate of revision in the long-term. A prospective study identified that patients with daily pad test results <900 mL and a Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) of not 4 (i.e., early and persistent stream or urine loss) are the best candidates. Future studies centered on the elder population at higher risk of impaired cognitive ability and in patients including radiation as prostate cancer treatment are needed.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0150.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207