MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Acute Page Kidney Following Renal Allograft Biopsy: A Complication Requiring Early Recognition and Treatment

2008· article· en· W2005175397 on OpenAlexaff
J. Chung, Yves Caumartin, Jim Warren, Patrick Luke

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnuriaSurgeryComplicationKidneyKidney transplantationRenal functionHematomaDialysisTransplantationRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The acute Page kidney phenomenon occurs as a consequence of external compression of the renal parenchyma leading to renal ischemia and hypertension. Between January 2000 and September 2007, 550 kidney transplants and 518 ultrasound-guided kidney biopsies were performed. During that time, four recipients developed acute oligo-anuria following ultrasound-guided allograft biopsy. Emergent doppler-ultrasounds were performed demonstrating absence of diastolic flow as well as a sub-capsular hematoma of the kidney. Prompt surgical exploration with allograft capsulotomy was performed in all cases. Immediately after capsulotomy, intraoperative Doppler study demonstrated robust return of diastolic flow. Three patients maintained good graft function, and one kidney was lost due to acute antibody-mediated rejection. We conclude that postbiopsy anuria associated with a subcapsular hematoma and acute absence of diastolic flow on doppler ultrasound should be considered pathognomonic of APK. All renal transplant specialists should be able to recognize this complication, because immediate surgical decompression can salvage the allograft.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations63
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207