PORTAL HYPERTENSION AFTER LIVER TRANSPLANTATION: LONG TERM FOLLOW‐UP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To describe the long-term changes in the clinical and imaging features of portal hypertension (PHT) following liver transplantation in children. Methods: Retrospective chart and database review of consecutive children undergoing their first liver transplant at one institution between 1993 and 2003. Details of clinical progress and ultrasound or CT imaging were recorded at 1y post-transplantation and at last follow-up. Results: Data were extracted on 112 children (median age at transplant 1.7 y, range 1 m-17.9 y, 59 girls) who underwent 121 transplants. Primary diagnoses included biliary atresia (n = 53), acute liver failure (19), hepatoblastoma (9), TPN liver disease (4), Alagille syndrome (3), tyrosinemia (3), sclerosing cholangitis (3) and others (18). Last follow-up occurred at a median 3.4y after transplantation. Seventeen children had died within 1y of transplant (median 47 days, range 1-215 days) and a further 3 died after longer follow-up (3.8 y-6.8 y). Follow-up data from ultrasound scans of 86 and 78 children at 1 y and at last follow-up, respectively, are presented in the table. Ascites was mostly of minimal volume. PV thrombosis was recognized in 1 child at 1 y and 2 children at last follow-up. GI bleeding occurred in 5 children by last follow-up and was due to portal vein (PV) thrombosis, arteriovenous fistula and/or parenchymal disease.TABLEConclusion: The imaging features of PHT often persist long after liver transplantation. Only a minority of children develop clinically significant sequelae of PHT, which arises from both vascular and parenchymal disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".