MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387340475 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8583

NS-AUA 2023 Annual Meeting Abstracts – Female Urology, Incontinence

2023· article· en· W4387340475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Editor CUAJ

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrologyMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an approved therapy for OAB, urinary retention without obstruction, and bowel disorders.During surgical implantation, fluoroscopy is used to target an electrical lead to the sacral nerve and images are stored in the electronic medical record (EMR); however, these images are not routinely used for quantitative measurements of SNM lead location.We, therefore, conducted a retrospective study to capture and quantify lead depth and implant angle from these fluoroscopic images to test their utility.To examine the functional relevance of these measurements, we compared them to motor thresholds obtained during surgery.Methods: EMRs were reviewed from 16 patients with implanted Axonics SNM leads (model 1201).Lead angles and contact depths were measured from lateral fluoroscopic images.Contact depths were measured relative to the posterior sacral plane.Without image magnification, we calculated depths as the percent-age of each patient's sacral thickness (%ST).Lead angle was measured in degrees between the ventral aspect of the sacrum and the lead.As a measure of therapy relevance, we compared lead and contact locations to available bellows motor or sensory thresholds (bipolar stim) which are related to SNM efficacy.Student's t-test (Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons) was used for statistical significance (p<0.05).Results: Mean contact depths ranged from 81% ST±15 (SD) for the shallowest contact (#3) to 184% ST±27 for the deepest (#0).Mean implant depths across the contacts (0-3) were all significantly different (t-test, Bonferonni adjustment).The mean lead angle was 80±11°.Bellows threshold was significantly smaller for cathodic stimulation at contact 3 vs.contact 0 (0.9±0.1, SEM vs 1.2±0.1 mA, p<0.05).Results also revealed a potential optimal lead angle for angles between 75-85°.Within this range, mean bellows thresholds across the lead were significantly lower and had a smaller range relative to implant angles outside this range (Figure 1).Conclusions: SNM contact depths and implant angles can be measured from fluoroscopic images captured during implantation.There are significant relationships between these measurements and bellows motor thresholds.Together, these results suggest quantitative fluoroscopic measurements of lead angles and contact depths are therapeutically relevant.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3730.212

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicPelvic floor disorders treatments→French-language works237,207→