Sexual Health After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have reported improved health-related quality of life outcomes after orthotopic liver transplantation; however, specific research regarding sexual health in liver transplant recipients is limited. We surveyed liver transplant recipients to determine the prevalence of sexual dysfunction. Of the 320 adult liver transplant recipients surveyed by mailed questionnaire, 150 responded (42%). The median age was 54 years. A total of 62% of respondents were male, and 93% were at least 1 year after transplantation. Thirty-six respondents (24%) reported sexual dysfunction before transplantation; this persisted in 22 patients (15%) after transplantation. A total of 48 respondents (32%) reported de novo sexual dysfunction after transplantation. After transplantation, 23% of male and 26% of female respondents reported decreased libido, and 33% of men and 26% of women reported having difficulty reaching orgasm with intercourse. A total of 42% of respondents felt that immunosuppressive medication was the main contributing factor to their sexual problems: 33% and 35% of respondents receiving tacrolimus or cyclosporine monotherapy, respectively, experienced some degree of sexual problems after transplantation. Despite the reported sexual problems, 59% of respondents were "moderately" to "very satisfied" with their sexual relationships after transplantation. Nineteen percent of the respondents used sildenafil to improve their sexual function, and 65% of these reported benefit. In conclusion, sexual problem after orthotopic liver transplantation is a common but poorly studied problem. Although this single-center study has shed some light on the relationship between liver transplantation and sexual health, further prospective studies, involving larger study population and validated instruments, will be needed to better evaluate the influence of liver transplantation on recipients' sexual health.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".