MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030620843 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000020339

Influence of intraoperative oxygen content on early postoperative graft dysfunction in living donor liver transplantation

2020· review· en· W3030620843 on OpenAlexaff
Hyung Mook Lee, Tae Hee Kim, Ho Joong Choi, Jaesik Park, Jung‐Woo Shim, Yong-Suk Kim, Young Eun Moon, Sang Hyun Hong, Min Suk Chae

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
FundersSeoul St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic University of KoreaCatholic University of Korea
KeywordsMedicineLiver transplantationAnesthesiaOxygenSurgeryTransplantationGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of intraoperative oxygen content on the development of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) in patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).This retrospective review included 452 adult patients who underwent elective LDLT. Our study population was classified into 2 groups: EAD and non-EAD. Arterial blood gas analysis was routinely performed 3 times during surgery: during the preanhepatic phase (ie, immediately after anesthetic induction); during the anhepatic phase (ie, at the onset of hepatic venous anastomosis); and during the neohepatic phase (ie, 1 hour after graft reperfusion). Arterial oxygen content (milliliters per deciliters) was derived using the following equation: (1.34 × hemoglobin [gram per deciliters] × SaO2 [%] × 0.01) + (0.0031 × PaO2 [mmHg]).The incidence of EAD occurrence was 13.1% (n = 59). Although oxygen contents at the preanhepatic phase were comparable between the 2 groups, the oxygen contents at the anhepatic and neohepatic phases were lower in the EAD group than in the non-EAD group. Patients with postoperative EAD had lower oxygen content immediately before and continuously after graft reperfusion, compared to patients without postoperative EAD. After the preanhepatic phase, oxygen content decreased in the EAD group but increased in the non-EAD group. The oxygen content and prevalence of normal oxygen content gradually increased during surgery in the non-EAD group, but not in the EAD group. Multivariable analysis revealed that oxygen content during the anhepatic phase and higher preoperative CRP levels were factors independently associated with the occurrence of EAD (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.754; 95% confidence interval: 0.681-0.826; P < .001 in the model). Postoperatively, patients with EAD had a longer duration of hospitalization, higher incidences of acute kidney injury and infection, and experienced higher rates of patient mortality, compared to patients without EAD.Lower arterial oxygen concentration may negatively impact the functional recovery of the graft after LDLT, despite preserved hepatic vascular flow. Before graft reperfusion, the levels of oxygen content components, such as hemoglobin content, PaO2, and SaO2, should be regularly assessed and carefully maintained to ensure proper oxygen delivery into transplanted liver grafts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207