Role of hepatocytes and bile duct cells in preservation-reperfusion injury of liver grafts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In liver transplantation, it is currently hypothesized that nonparenchymal cell damage and/or activation is the major cause of preservation-related graft injury. Because parenchymal cells (hepatocytes) appear morphologically well preserved even after extended cold preservation, their injury after warm reperfusion is ascribed to the consequences of nonparenchymal cell damage and/or activation. However, accumulating evidence over the past decade indicated that the current hypothesis cannot fully explain preservation-related liver graft injury. We review data obtained in animal and human liver transplantation and isolated perfused animal livers, as well as isolated cell models to highlight growing evidence of the importance of hepatocyte disturbances in the pathogenesis of normal and fatty graft injury. Particular attention is given to preservation time-dependent decreases in high-energy adenine nucleotide levels in liver cells, a circumstance that (1) sensitizes hepatocytes to various stimuli and insults, (2) correlates well with graft function after liver transplantation, and (3) may also underlie the preservation time-dependent increase in endothelial cell damage. We also review damage to bile duct cells, which is increasingly being recognized as important in the long-lasting phase of reperfusion injury. The role of hydrophobic bile salts in that context is particularly assessed. Finally, a number of avenues aimed at preserving hepatocyte and bile duct cell integrity are discussed in the context of liver transplantation therapy as a complement to reducing nonparenchymal cell damage and/or activation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".