Long‐term outcomes of pediatric living donor liver transplantation at a single institution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There have only been a few studies on the long-term outcomes and prognostic factors after pediatric LDLT. We conducted a retrospective, single-center assessment of the outcomes as well as the demographic and clinical factors that influenced the poor outcomes in 113 children aged <16 (median age 21 months; 6 months-15.5 yr) who underwent 115 LDLTs, predominantly for biliary atresia (60.9%) and FHF (14.8%), between 1994 and 2006 at Asan Medical Center. Left lateral segment or left lobe grafts were implanted into most of these children (86.9%) according to routine procedures. The overall rates of graft survival at one, five, and 10 yr were 89.6%, 83.0%, and 81.5%, respectively, and the overall rates of patient survival were 92.9%, 86.3%, and 84.8%, respectively. Virus-related disease (41.2%) and chronic rejection (29.4%) were the major causes of mortality. On multivariate analysis, UNOS status 1a and 1b and chronic rejection were significant risk factors for both graft and patient loss, whereas the PELD score >25 was a significant risk factor for graft loss. Patient and graft survival may be related not only to post-operative complications, but also to the patient's preoperative clinical condition.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".