MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087109816 · doi:10.1016/j.xjtc.2020.08.066

Commentary: Up, down, right, left: Addressing the shortage of donor lungs for transplantation

2020· editorial· en· W3087109816 on OpenAlex
Elliot Wakeam, Andrew C. Chang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJTCVS Techniques · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageDonationLung transplantationMedicineTransplantationLungSurgeryIntensive care medicinePolitical scienceInternal medicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central MessageAlthough an innovative approach to extending the use of donor lungs is described, continued efforts to improve overall donation rate should be pursued.See Article page 395. Although an innovative approach to extending the use of donor lungs is described, continued efforts to improve overall donation rate should be pursued. See Article page 395. Worldwide, donor lungs for lung transplantation remain in short supply. In no country is this shortage as acute as it is in Japan, where donation rates remain low due to cultural and other factors. As a result, Japanese lung transplant surgeons are renown for their creativity and technical prowess in addressing this shortage. Chida and colleagues1Chida M. Araki O. Karube Y. Maeda S. Right-to-left inverted single lung transplantation.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Tech. 2020; 4: 395-397Google Scholar from Dokkyo Medical University School of Medicine detail their technique of right-to-left inverted single lung transplantation—an extension of the work that has been done in Japan to pioneer living donor lung transplantation and other techniques to address the donor shortage. They should be commended for describing this complex, technical operation. In North America, the reasons for donor lung shortages are not related to a low rate of donation, but rather to a low rate of use by surgeons of potentially eligible donor lungs. In the United States especially, where the majority of lung transplantation is done in relatively low-volume centers, many useable donor lungs are discarded. Several reports have confirmed that decline of lungs for quality or other reasons on the US donor list does not indicate that lungs are not usable, in fact Cypel and colleagues2Cypel M. Outcomes of lung transplantation at a Canadian center using donors from the United States. Presented at: the 100th Annual Meeting of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery:A Virtual Learning Experience; May 22-23, 2020.Google Scholar from the Toronto Lung Transplant Program have detailed their experience using lungs declined across the United States and found no difference in outcomes of these versus standard donor lungs from Canada. Other reports have shown that regardless of where a lung is accepted on the US match run list, the outcomes do not differ, implying that declines at the top of the list are not reliable markers of organ quality.3Singh E. Schecter M. Towe C. Rizwan R. Roosevelt B. Tweddell J. et al.Sequence of refusals for donor quality, organ utilization, and survival after lung transplantation.J Heart Lung Transplant. 2019; 38: 35-42Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (21) Google Scholar The reasons for this are myriad, and include lack of specialized training in lung transplant, little experience with salvage techniques for marginal donors such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and others, but certainly an unwillingness to take on risk because of the implications for United Network for Organ Sharing reporting and regulatory backlash also play a role. The report from Chida and colleagues1Chida M. Araki O. Karube Y. Maeda S. Right-to-left inverted single lung transplantation.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Tech. 2020; 4: 395-397Google Scholar is an impressive technical feat, and the authors should be congratulated on the successful implementation of this technique. However, given the relative number of donors and recipients in the United States, the applicability of a complex technique is questionable in this country, when simply making the decision to use a greater number of standard donors would suffice. Changing our decision making en masse is no easy feat, and would require a concerted effort from national policy makers to encourage greater use of donor organs in centers of excellence. If we could stop turning down so many lungs, we could use them up—and we would not need to flip them from right to left. Right-to-left inverted single lung transplantationJTCVS TechniquesVol. 4PreviewDonor shortage is a critical issue in some areas; thus, single-lung transplantation remains popular. In most countries, a scoring system has been established that allows for the neediest patients to have priority for receiving a donor organ, and it is important to perform lung transplantation using any available lung in those cases. In some patients with uneven disease laterality, transplantation for the worst side is usually suitable, although waiting for a specific side may lose the opportunity for lung transplantation. Full-Text PDF Open Access

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.339 · 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