Interpreting Outcomes in DCDD Liver Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Background In the United States, 5% of adult liver transplant recipients receive a graft donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD). Concerns for ischemic cholangiopathy (IC), a disease of diffuse intrahepatic stricturing limits broader DCDD use. Single-center reports demonstrate large variation in outcomes. Methods Retrospective deidentified data collected between 2005 and 2013 were entered electronically by 10 centers via a Research Electronic Data Capture database. Our primary outcome was development of intrahepatic biliary strictures consistent with IC. Results Within 6 months post-DCDD transplant, 162 (21.8%) patients developed a biliary stricture, of which 88 (11.8%) exhibited intrahepatic structuring consistent with IC. Unadjusted 6-month IC rate among the 10 centers varied significantly (P = 0.006) from 6.3% to 25.9%. The only factor associated with increased risk of IC within 6 months was Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (vs duct-to-duct) (odds ratio, 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-6.16; P = 0.002). Graft failure by 6 months was more than 3 times higher for DCDD recipients with IC (odds ratio for IC, 3.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.95-5.79). Conclusions This first report of the large combined experience with DCDD from the Improving DCDD Outcomes in Liver Transplant consortium demonstrates significant differences in IC among centers, the importance of biliary strictures as a risk factor for graft failure, and does not validate other risk factors for IC found in smaller studies. This large series of transplants for donation after cardiac death livers was collected in a multi-center consortium. The use of Roux Y biliary reconstruction was strongly associated with the development of biliary stricture. Large variability due to center effects was noted, suggesting best practices need further dissemination within the consortium.
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 | 0.011 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".