Reuse of liver graft from a brain dead recipient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain death in fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) is a rare occurrence after successful orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Reuse of the liver graft may be considered. We report a successful OLT using such an organ in a 62-yr-old man with hematochromatosis-related cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Liver donor was 56-yr-old man with normal liver function tests. First recipient was a 26-yr-old woman with an acetaminophen-induced FHF. Before OLT, she developed progressive coma without obvious cerebral edema on the cerebral CT-scan. The transplantation proceeded as planned and was uneventful. However, patient exhibited bilateral non-reactive mydriasis during postoperative hours and was declared brain dead. Transplanted liver was functioning adequately. Its reuse was discussed with her family and the second recipient. After informed consent, the transplanted liver and heart were harvested. First and second liver cold ischemia times were 10 h and 75 min, respectively. RESULTS: Second recipient recovered uneventful and discharged 23 d after OLT. Liver function is still normal 30 months after OLT without rejection or hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence. CONCLUSION: Even after OLT, brain death remains possible in FHF. In absence of contraindications, reuse of transplanted liver allows for a rational use of already rare liver grafts.
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 | 0.001 | 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".