Liver Transplant Can Resolve Severe Neuropsychiatric Manifestations of Wilson Disease: A Case Report.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although liver transplant for decompensated cirrhosis secondary to Wilson disease is well accepted, the use of transplant for patients with severe neurologic manifestations of this condition remains controversial, and these can be perceived as a contraindication. Here, we describe a 45-year-old woman who presented with an incidental hepatocellular carcinoma at the time of transplant. The patient had severe neurologic manifestations of Wilson disease pretransplant, including dysarthria, hyperreflexia, asymmetrical ataxia, tremor, bradyphrenia, and shuffling gait. She underwent successful transplant from a hepatic and surgical standpoint, but her postoperative course was marked by protracted mutism, hypophonia, and fluctuating akinesia and immobility that did not respond promptly to withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitors or pramipexole but did respond robustly to amantadine. At 9 months posttransplant, there was marked neurologic improvement, and, at 18 months, she exhibited subtle memory and organizational difficulties but was fully ambulatory and otherwise completely functional. Our experience suggests that even patients with severe neurologic Wilson disease may recover after transplant, albeit slowly, demonstrating the need for a multidisciplinary approach, including pre- and posttransplant neurologic and neuropsychiatric consultations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".