MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117585314 · doi:10.1002/bco2.70134

Influence of sheath size on suction mini‐PCNL outcomes: An observational study from the EAU endourology section and the global suction in mini‐PCNL collaborative study group

2025· article· en· W7117585314 on OpenAlexaff
Vineet Gauhar, Bhaskar Somani, S. C.‐H. Yuen, Kemal Sarica, Marek Zawadzki, Abhishek Singh, Khi Yung Fong, Angelo Cormio, Wei Zhu, Jaisukh Kalathia, Nariman Gadzhiev, Vigen Malkhasyan, Yadgar Abduljabbar Shwani, O. Angerri Feu, Ben H. Chew, Guohua Zheng, Thomas R. W. Herrmann, Daniele Castellani

Bibliographic record

VenueBJUI Compass · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuctionObservational studySection (typography)Selection (genetic algorithm)Motion study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective We aim to evaluate the association between sheath size and outcomes in suction mini‐percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SM‐PCNL). Materials and Methods A prospective, multicentre study enrolled 1534 patients undergoing SM‐PCNL from March to November 2024 across 30 centres. Patients were stratified into three groups: Group 1 (14–15 Fr, n = 780), Group 2 (16–18 Fr, n = 388), and Group 3 (20–22 Fr, n = 366). Primary outcome was 30‐day stone‐free rate (SFR) determined by non‐contrast CT. Secondary outcomes included complications, operative times and hospital stay. Results Group 3 achieved the highest zero residual fragment rate (92.6%) compared to Groups 2 (80.7%) and 1 (79.5%) ( p < 0.001). Operative times were shortest in Group 3 (36 min) and longest in Group 2 (65 min). Larger sheaths were associated with significantly higher overall complication rates: Group 1 (7.6%), Group 2 (14.4%) and Group 3 (14.8%) ( p < 0.001). Transfusion requirements increased with sheath size: 0% (Group 1), 1.5% (Group 2) and 3.3% (Group 3). Group 3 had exclusive pleural injuries requiring chest tubes (2.7%) and highest pelvicalyceal perforation rates (4.1% vs 1.3% in Group 2, 0% in Group 1). Larger sheath (16/18 Fr: OR 1.82; 21/22 Fr: OR 4.14) and single step dilation (OR 3.84) were associated with higher odds of zero residual fragments. Sheath size 21/22 Fr (OR 2.12) and increasing Guys stone score (score 2: OR 1.94; score 3: OR 3.51; score 4: OR 2.63 95% CI) were factors significantly associated with higher odds of overall complications. Conclusions Sheath selection in SM‐PCNL requires balancing efficacy against safety. Larger sheaths (20–22 Fr) optimize stone clearance but increase complications. Smaller sheaths (14–15 Fr) offer superior safety for simple cases. Intermediate sizes (16–18 Fr) may represent an optimal compromise for moderately complex stones.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJUI CompassSame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207