Biliary Strictures in 130 Consecutive Right Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplant Recipients: Results of a Western Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biliary strictures remain the most challenging aspect of adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT). Between 04/2000 and 10/2005, 130 consecutive RLDLTs were performed in our center and followed prospectively. Median follow-up was 23 months (range 3-67) and 1-year graft and patient survival was 85% and 87%, respectively. Overall incidence of biliary leaks (n = 19) or strictures (n = 22) was 32% (41/128) in 33 patients (26%). A duct-to-duct (D-D) or Roux-en-Y (R-Y) anastomosis were performed equally (n = 64 each) with no difference in stricture rate (p = 0.31). The use of ductoplasty increased the number of grafts with a single duct for anastomosis and reduced the biliary complication rate compared to grafts >/=2 ducts (17% vs. 46%; p = 0.02). Independent risk factors for strictures included older donor age and previous history of a bile leak. All strictures were managed nonsurgically initially but four patients ultimately required conversion from D-D to R-Y. Ninety-six percent (123/128) of patients are currently free of any biliary complications. D-D anastomosis is safe after RLDLT and provides access for future endoscopic therapy in cases of leak or stricture. When presented with multiple bile ducts, ductoplasty should be considered to reduce the potential chance of stricture.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".