MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cold Machine Perfusion Versus Static Cold Storage of Kidneys Donated After Cardiac Death: A UK Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

2010· article· en· W2125104239 on OpenAlex
Christopher J.E. Watson, Antonia C. Wells, Rebecca Roberts, Jacob A. Akoh, Peter J. Friend, Murat Akyol, Francis Calder, Jennifer Allen, Mark N. A. Jones, D. Collett, J. Andrew Bradley

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited
KeywordsMedicineMachine perfusionCold storageTransplantationKidney transplantationRandomized controlled trialContext (archaeology)KidneyDialysisClinical endpointUrologySurgeryPerfusionRenal functionInternal medicineLiver transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One third of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the UK are donated following cardiac death (DCD). Such kidneys have a high rate of delayed graft function (DGF) following transplantation. We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to determine whether kidney preservation using cold, pulsatile machine perfusion (MP) was superior to simple cold storage (CS) for DCD kidneys. One kidney from each DCD donor was randomly allocated to CS, the other to MP. A sequential trial design was used with the primary endpoint being DGF, defined as the necessity for dialysis within the first 7 days following transplant. The trial was stopped when data were available for 45 pairs of kidneys. There was no difference in the incidence of DGF between kidneys assigned to MP or CS (58% vs. 56%, respectively), in the context of an asystolic period of 15 min and median cold ischemic times of 13.9 h for MP and 14.3 h for CS kidneys. Renal function at 3 and 12 months was similar between groups, as was graft and patient survival. For kidneys from controlled DCD donors (with mean cold ischemic times around 14 h), MP offers no advantage over CS, which is cheaper and more straightforward. One third of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the UK are donated following cardiac death (DCD). Such kidneys have a high rate of delayed graft function (DGF) following transplantation. We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to determine whether kidney preservation using cold, pulsatile machine perfusion (MP) was superior to simple cold storage (CS) for DCD kidneys. One kidney from each DCD donor was randomly allocated to CS, the other to MP. A sequential trial design was used with the primary endpoint being DGF, defined as the necessity for dialysis within the first 7 days following transplant. The trial was stopped when data were available for 45 pairs of kidneys. There was no difference in the incidence of DGF between kidneys assigned to MP or CS (58% vs. 56%, respectively), in the context of an asystolic period of 15 min and median cold ischemic times of 13.9 h for MP and 14.3 h for CS kidneys. Renal function at 3 and 12 months was similar between groups, as was graft and patient survival. For kidneys from controlled DCD donors (with mean cold ischemic times around 14 h), MP offers no advantage over CS, which is cheaper and more straightforward.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it