Diaphragmatic Hernia After Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: Proposal for a Screening Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is increasingly being used to improve access to liver transplantation for those with end-stage liver disease. Although recipient outcomes are equivalent, donor complication rates range from 10% to 41%. A rare, but potentially serious complication is occurrence of a diaphragmatic hernia (DH), of which 9 cases have been reported so far in the literature. The purpose of this work was to review the clinical impact of DH post-LDH, including risk factors (RF) in hope of mitigating impact. METHODS: A literature review was performed identifying all previous reports of post-operative DH in living liver donors. Demographic and outcome data were gathered to help identify RF. We also report 2 cases from our own institution. RESULTS: Reported incidences range from 0.6% to 2.3%, of which the majority are delayed (≥19 months). Obstruction or intestinal strangulation was present in 45%, 60% of whom required an intestinal resection. The most common RF was right lobe donation. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative DH is a rare but serious complication of LDH. The major RFs are right lobe donation and potentially conditions resulting in increased intraabdominal pressure. Diaphragmatic hernia frequently lead to intestinal obstruction and strangulation and should be repaired when identified. The implementation of a screening protocol for early identification could lead to repair before the development of complications. We propose the addition of screening chest x-ray to follow-up protocols to aid in the identification and subsequent repair of postoperative DH. Such a practice could hopefully reduce the clinical impact of this complication.
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 | 0.036 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".