Outcomes after discontinuation of routine use of transanastomotic biliary stents in pediatric liver transplantation at a single site
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Routine use of transanastomotic biliary stents (RTBS) for biliary reconstruction in liver transplantation (LT) is controversial, with conflicting outcomes in adult randomized trials. Pediatric literature contains limited data. This study is a retrospective review of 99 patients who underwent first LT (2005-2014). In 2011, RTBS was discontinued at our center. This study describes biliary complications following LT with and without RTBS. 56 (56%) patients had RTBS. Median age at LT was 1.9 yr (IQR 0.7, 8.6); 55% were female. Most common indication for LT was biliary atresia (36%). Most common biliary reconstruction was Roux-en-Y choledochojejunostomy (75% with RTBS, 58% without RTBS, p = 0.09). Biliary complications (strictures, bile leaks, surgical revision) occurred in 23% without significant difference between groups (20% with RTBS, 28% without RTBS, p = 0.33). Patients with RTBS had routine cholangiography via the tube at 6-8 wk; thus, significantly more patients with RTBS had cholangiograms (91% vs. 19%, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the number of patients who required therapeutic intervention via endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (11% with RTBS, 19% no RTBS, p = 0.26). Routine use of RTBS for biliary reconstruction in pediatric LT may not be necessary, and possibly associated with need for costlier, invasive imaging without improvement in outcomes.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".