Augmentation Cystoplasty: Experience in the Developing World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo assess functional outcomes and classify postoperative complications of augmentation cystoplasty by the Clavien-Dindo classification system.MethodsA total of 197 adult patients undergoing augmentation cystoplasty between January 2016 and December 2020 at the Department of Urology, Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT), were included in the study after obtaining approval from the ethics review committee. Patients’ records were reviewed for assessment of complications up to 3 months of follow-up. Functional outcomes were assessed by comparing preoperative video urodynamics study (VUDS) findings with follow-up VUDS findings at 1 year. IBM SPSS v23 was used to record and analyze all the complications, treatments, and pre- and postoperative VUDS data.ResultsOf the 197 patients included in this study, 127 (64.5%) were male and 70 (35.5%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 38.4 ± 9.92 years. Eighty-seven patients (44.2%) remained complication-free, 64 patients (32.5%) had grade I-II complications, 44 patients (22.3%) had grade III and IV complications, and only 2 patients (1%) had grade V complications. Stomal stenosis was the most frequent complication, occurring in 14.7% of patients, followed by renal function deterioration and high-grade fever, each noted in 13.7% of patients. Mean preoperative bladder capacity was 144.3 ± 63.09 mL, mean preoperative filling pressure was 43.34 ± 26.92 cm3 H2O, while mean postoperative bladder capacity was 460.83 ± 70.69 mL and mean postoperative filling pressure was 7.47 ± 5.79 cm3 H2O.ConclusionAugmentation cystoplasty can increase bladder capacity and improve bladder function. Because of the potential for complications, it is essential to carefully choose patients for surgery and provide proper preoperative counseling. Additionally, it is crucial to give proactive postoperative care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".