Multicentric outcome analysis of sirolimus-based immunosuppression in 252 liver transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: The use of sirolimus (SRL) in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been controversial after experimental data suggested an increased risk of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT). To assess the safety and efficacy of SRL as de novo immunosuppression in OLT recipients. Outcomes of 252 OLT patients who received SRL were compared with outcomes of 291 OLT recipients who received calcineurin inhibitor in a retrospective study. Primary outcomes of this study were: patient- and graft survivals, vascular, biliary, wound complications and rejection rates. Secondary outcomes were: postoperative infection rate, bone marrow and renal function and changes of lipid levels. Patient- and graft survivals, rejection and infection rates were similar. In the SRL group, HAT occurred in 1.2%, biliary complications in 19.4%, and incisional hernias in 9.1%. In the control group the incidence of HAT was 5.8% (P = 0.004), biliary complications 18.5% (P = NS) and incisional hernias 7.2% (P = NS). Patients on SRL experienced significantly higher levels of serum triglycerides but fewer acute cellular rejections. Bone marrow and renal functions were similar in both the groups. Our findings would suggest that SRL is safe and effective for very selected OLT recipients. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm our results.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".