MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403008444 · doi:10.4103/iju.iju_38_24

The reused-disposable scope in flexible ureteroscopy for stones as a cost-conscious approach: Reporting the outcomes of a real-world practice multicenter study of 2183 patients by the team of worldwide endourological researchers group

2024· article· en· W4403008444 on OpenAlexaff
Vineet Gauhar, Olivier Traxer, Ravindra Sabnis, Khi Yung Fong, Parimalsinh Gharia, Rishi Grover, Deepak Ragoori, Jean K. Lim, Yiloren Tanidir, Amish Mehta, Mehmet Ilker Gökce, Mohamed Amine Lakmichi, Boyke Soebhali, Nariman Gadzhiev, Ben H. Chew, Bhaskar Somani, Daniele Castellani

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScope (computer science)UreteroscopyMulticenter studySurgeryUreterRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: We aimed to assess complications and stone-free rate of flexible ureteroscopy (FU) reusing disposable scopes (RDS) after repeated sterilization. Methods: Data from adults from 11 centers were retrospectively reviewed (January 2020-December 2022). Inclusion criteria were proximal ureteral/renal stone(s). All cases were performed using an RDS to save costs for patients who come from economically challenged environments. Residual fragments (RFs) were defined as single fragment ≥4 mm or multiple fragments of any size within 3 months. Continuous variables are presented as median and interquartile range. Results: Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three patients were included, of whom 67.0% were male. Median age was 48.0 (36-59) years. The median stone diameter was 10.2 (9-14) mm. Flash sterilization was used in 90.2% (plasma in 60.5%). Approximately, 88% had FU with an RDS used ≤2 times (12%: 3-5 times). RDS needed to be changed intraoperatively in 3.9% of cases due to its malfunction. Commonly, defects in RDS function were reported in upward (1.6%) and downward deflection (6.5%) and image quality on white balancing (4.7%). Fever >38C was seen in 13.7% of cases, and sepsis in 0.5%. RFs were found in 31.4% of cases. Lower pole (odds ratio [OR] 5.63) or pelvis stone (OR 4.67), faulty scopes (OR 12.8), and total operation time (OR 1.05) were factors associated with higher odds of RFs. Stone size (OR 1.09), positive urine culture (OR 1.67), interpolar stone (OR 1.68), and prestenting (OR 1.37) were factors associated with higher odds of fever/sepsis. Conclusions: RDS was used as a cost-conscious approach with a low rate of serious infections but with a high rate of RFs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of UrologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207