Cognitive Impairment in Liver Transplant Recipients ≥3 Months After Transplant (P4-4.006)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<h3>Objective:</h3> Characterize prevalence of cognitive impairment after liver transplant <h3>Background:</h3> Liver transplant (LT) recipients have a high burden of factors known to lead to cognitive impairment (CI) in other populations, yet little work has explored cognitive function in this population. We aimed to characterize the prevalence of CI in LT recipients ≥3 months post-LT. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> We enrolled ambulatory adults with cirrhosis at the UCSF LT center. Patients with hepatic encephalopathy on pre-LT exam (Numbers Connection Test A>45 seconds) or who did not receive LT were excluded. CI was assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) pre-LT and ≥3 months post-LT (CI=MoCA<24). Demographics, comorbidities, history of hepatic encephalopathy and months since LT were abstracted from hepatology notes on day of study visit. Logistic regression associated CI and co-variables. <h3>Results:</h3> Of 98 participants, median age was 58 years (Q1–Q3 50–63), 72% had ≥12years education, 42% were female, 14% had diabetes, 34% had hypertension, and 51% had a history of hepatic encephalopathy. Median time between LT and post-LT MoCA was 7 months (Q1–Q3 5–12). Median post-LT MoCA score was 26 (Q1–Q3 23–27). 30% of all subjects had CI post-LT. 27% of those evaluated ≥12 months post-LT had CI. Compared to those without post-LT CI, those with post-LT CI had lower median pre-LT MoCA score (22(19–25) vs. 25(24–27), p<0.001); no other differences in co-variables were found. In multivariable analyses, controlling for age, education, and time since LT, for each point increase in pre-LT MoCA score, odds of CI post-LT decreased by 27% (OR 0.73, 95%CI 0.61–0.86, p<0.001). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> CI is highly prevalent (30%) in LT recipients ≥3 months after LT, despite this population having a median age far younger than those with CI from the general population. Furthermore, our data raise the possibility that neither classical risk factors for CI nor past hepatic encephalopathy explain CI in this population. <b>Disclosure:</b> Dr. Berry has nothing to disclose. Miss Barry has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of UCSF . Amy Shui has nothing to disclose. Ms. Wong has nothing to disclose. Mrs. Seetharaman has nothing to disclose. Dr. Kent has nothing to disclose. The institution of Dr. Ruck has received research support from National Institutes of Health. Dr. VandeVrede has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Retrotope. Dr. Lai has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Novo Nordisk. Dr. Lai has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for AASLD. The institution of Dr. Lai has received research support from NIH. Dr. Lai has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Drug Advisory Board member with FDA.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».