Long‐term follow‐up of biliary complications after adult right‐lobe living donor liver transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Long-term biliary complications after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are not well described in the literature. This study was undertaken to determine the long-term impact of biliary complications after adult right-lobe LDLT. METHODS: This retrospective review analyzed an 11-yr experience of 344 consecutive right-lobe LDLTs with at least two yr of follow-up. RESULTS: Biliary leaks occurred in 50 patients (14.5%), and strictures occurred in 67 patients (19.5%). Cumulative biliary complication rates at 1, 2, 5, and 10 yr were 29%, 32%, 36%, and 37%, respectively. Most early biliary leaks were treated with surgical drainage (N = 29, 62%). Most biliary strictures were treated first with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (42%). There was no association between biliary strictures and the number of ducts (hazard ratio [HR] 1.017 [0.65-1.592], p = 0.94), but freedom from biliary stricture was associated with a more recent era (2006-2010) (HR 0.457 [0.247-0.845], p = 0.01). Long-term graft survival did not differ between those who had or did not have biliary complications (66% vs. 67% at 10 yr). CONCLUSIONS: Biliary strictures are common after LDLT but may decline with a center's experience. With careful follow-up, they can be successfully treated, with excellent long-term graft survival rates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".