Clinical islet isolation and transplantation outcomes with deceased cardiac death donors are similar to neurological determination of death donors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In islet transplantation, deceased cardiac death (DCD) donation has been identified as a potential extended source. There are currently no studies comparing outcomes between these categories, and our goal was to compare islet isolation success rates and transplantation outcomes between DCD and neurological determination of death (NDD) donors. Islet isolations from 15 DCD and 418 NDD were performed in our centre between September 2008 and September 2014. Donor variables, islet yields, metabolic function of isolated isled and insulin requirements at 1-month post-transplant were compared. Compared to NDD, pancreata from DCD were more often procured locally and donors required less vasopressive support (P < 0.001 and P = 0.023, respectively), but the other variables were similar between groups. Pre- and postpurification islet yields were similar between NDD and DCD (576 vs. 608 × 10(3) islet equivalent, P = 0.628 and 386 vs. 379, P = 0.881, respectively). The metabolic function was similar between NDD and DCD, as well as the mean decrease in insulin requirement at 1-month post-transplantation (NDD: 64.82%; DCD: 60.17% reduction, P = 0.517). These results support the broader use of DCD pancreata for islet isolation. A much larger DCD islet experience will be required to truly determine noninferiority of both short- and long-term outcomes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it