A case report of a combined laparoscopic-open approach to a bladder inguinal hernia and mesh herniorrhaphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An inguinoscrotal hernia of the urinary bladder is a rare surgical entity with an incidence of 0.5%–4%, in the literature. Its surgical management may vary given the paucity of information in the published literature. Most herniorrhaphy attempts have been open with some sporadic attempts at a laparoscopic preperitoneal repair. We present a unique combined approach involving a laparoscopic and open-mesh herniorrhaphy. The surgical outcomes are generally good, even in the presence of bladder complications such as necrosis or perforation. One of the advantages of the combined approach is the ability to confirm the pelvic bladder position posthernial reduction without the need for a voiding cystourethrogram. It also allows the surgeon to exclude any bladder injury which may have occurred during bladder reduction.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".