MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171862072 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfi252

Bladder vs enteric drainage in simultaneous pancreas–kidney transplantation

2005· article· en· W2171862072 on OpenAlexaff
Mauricio Monroy‐Cuadros, Anastasio Salazar, Serdar Yılmaz, Kevin McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePancreas transplantationPancreasTransplantationDiabetic nephropathyDiabetes mellitusKidneySurgeryDrainageKidney transplantationUrinary systemUrologyGastroenterologyInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As a valid therapeutic option for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and secondary diabetic nephropathy, simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplantation remains more undeveloped than other solid organ transplantations due to restrictions of surgical techniques, especially modes of exocrine pancreatic secretion. Enteric drainage (ED) has recently been increasingly popular due to the long-term complications with bladder drainage (BD). Objectives. Compare results of SPK transplants with enteric vs bladder exocrine drainage since the beginning of our experience with this type of transplantation. METHODS: From March 1998 to October 2004, 53 SPK transplants were performed, consisting of 30 with bladder drainage (BD) and 23 with enteric drainage (ED). Induction therapy included antilymphocyte globulin (ALG) or anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody. Maintenance regimen consisted of tacrolimus (TAC)/cyclosporine (CsA), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and steroids. RESULTS: Mean age of recipients was 39+/-7 in both groups. No anastomosis leakage occurred in either group. Surgical complications were not significantly different between the two groups. Incidence of acute rejection, major infections and cytomegalovirus disease were also similar. However, the BD group was characterized by a slight increase in number of urologic complications, metabolic acidosis and dehydration. The length of initial hospital stay was likewise comparable. All patients with a functional graft no longer required exogenous insulin. BD actuarial patient survival and graft three-year survival were 96 and 86%, respectively. For ED, the respective results were 97 and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Compared with BD, perioperative morbidity is not increased by ED, and ED is not associated with increased long-term pancreas graft failure. These data suggest that ED is superior to BD and should be considered as the preferred technique for simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207