Successful outcome after transplantation of a donor liver with focal nodular hyperplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because of the increasing gap in the number of patients awaiting organ transplantation and the supply of organ donors, reevaluation of donor criteria is an important issue in clinical transplantation. It has become necessary to make maximal use of the currently available donor pool. We describe a case of successful orthotopic liver transplantation in a 57-year-old man with Laënnec's cirrhosis using a liver containing an 8-cm focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) lesion involving segments II and III and the caudate lobe. The donor liver was procured from a 46-year-old woman declared brain dead after a subarachnoid hemorrhage. Definitive pathological diagnosis was made at laparotomy by obtaining a Tru-cut (Allegiance Health Care Inc, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) core biopsy specimen. The recipient operation was performed uneventfully except for bleeding from the biopsy site. The patient did well postoperatively and was discharged on tacrolimus, mofetil mycophenolate, and prednisone therapy. He continues to thrive 2(1/2) years posttransplantation with no change in the size of the lesion. In well-selected donors, FNH should not be a contraindication for use in transplantation. However, FNH must be differentiated from hepatocellular adenoma. Although FNH has a benign course with little propensity for bleeding and almost no malignant potential, hepatic adenoma is reported to have a 15% to 33% chance of bleeding and rupture with a well-documented potential for neoplastic degeneration, making the liver unsuitable for donation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".