MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1560000316 · doi:10.3791/52909

Normothermic <em>Ex Vivo</em> Kidney Perfusion for the Preservation of Kidney Grafts prior to Transplantation

2015· article· en· W1560000316 on OpenAlexaff
J. Moritz Kaths, Vinzent N. Spetzler, Nicolás Goldaracena, Juan Echeverri, Kristine S. Louis, Daniel Foltys, Mari Strempel, Paul S. F. Yip, Rohan John, István Mucsi, Anand Ghanekar, Darius Bägli, Lisa A. Robinson, Markus Selzner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEx vivoKidneyMedicineCold storagePerfusionMachine perfusionTransplantationKidney transplantationIn vivoUrologySurgeryLiver transplantationInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kidney transplantation has become a well-established treatment option for patients with end-stage renal failure. The persisting organ shortage remains a serious problem. Therefore, the acceptance criteria for organ donors have been extended leading to the usage of marginal kidney grafts. These marginal organs tolerate cold storage poorly resulting in increased preservation injury and higher rates of delayed graft function. To overcome the limitations of cold storage, extensive research is focused on alternative normothermic preservation methods. Ex vivo normothermic organ perfusion is an innovative preservation technique. The first experimental and clinical trials for ex vivo lung, liver, and kidney perfusions demonstrated favorable outcomes. In addition to the reduction of cold ischemic injury, the method of normothermic kidney storage offers the opportunity for organ assessment and repair. This manuscript provides information about kidney retrieval, organ preservation techniques, and isolated ex vivo normothermic kidney perfusion (NEVKP) in a porcine model. Surgical techniques, set up for the perfusion solution and the circuit, potential assessment options, and representative results are demonstrated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations43
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207