A prospective, randomized, pilot trial of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated collagen patch (Hemopatch®) for intraoperative hemostasis during deceased donor renal transplant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: ) in patients undergoing deceased donor renal transplant. The primary outcome was the amount of intraoperative estimated blood loss in those patients receiving the patch compared to without. Secondary outcomes were the subjective achievement of hemostasis, perigraft collection, and drop in hemoglobin 48 hours postoperatively. METHODS: We performed a single-center, prospective, randomized trial. Patients scheduled to undergo deceased donor renal transplant surgery were randomized to receive the PEG-coated patch or standard hemostasis (i.e., electrocautery and clips). RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were enrolled over 15 months and randomized to receive the PEG-coated patch (n=15) or standard hemostasis (n=15). The mean age was 62.5 years. As determined by the operating surgeon, hemostasis was successfully achieved in all 15 cases using the PEG-coated patch. In the PEG-coated patch group, there was a trend towards less estimated blood loss (237 cc vs. 327 cc; p=0.11) and a lower drop in hemoglobin 48 hours postoperatively (22.27 g/L vs. 29.53 g/L; p=0.09) compared to the standard hemostasis group. Perigraft collection was similar between groups (27% vs. 40%; p=0.43). Subgroup analysis on patients who received anticoagulation therapy revealed no significant difference in blood loss between groups. CONCLUSIONS: ) is a safe and feasible option to aid hemostasis during deceased donor renal transplant surgery. Hemostasis was successfully achieved in all cases using the PEG-coated patch.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".