Nuclear Imaging Techniques for the Assessment of Hepatic Function in Liver Surgery and Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review describes the application of 2 nuclear imaging techniques for assessment of hepatic function in the setting of liver surgery and transplantation. The biochemical and technical background, as well as the clinical applications, of (99m)Tc-labeled diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid galactosyl human serum albumin (GSA) scintigraphy and hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) with (99m)Tc-labeled iminodiacetic acid derivates is discussed. (99m)Tc-mebrofenin is considered the most suitable iminodiacetic acid agent for (99m)Tc-HBS. (99m)Tc-GSA scintigraphy and (99m)Tc-mebrofenin HBS are based on 2 different principles. (99m)Tc-GSA scintigraphy is a receptor-mediated technique whereas HBS represents hepatic uptake and excretion function. Both techniques are noninvasive and provide visual and quantitative information on both total and regional liver function. They can be used for preoperative assessment of future remnant liver function, follow-up after preoperative portal vein embolization, and evaluation of postoperative liver regeneration. In liver transplantation, these methods are used to assess graft function and biliary complications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".