MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170860153 · doi:10.3390/cells10061417

Lung Transplantation, Pulmonary Endothelial Inflammation, and Ex-Situ Lung Perfusion: A Review

2021· review· en· W3170860153 on OpenAlexaff
Keir A. Forgie, Nicholas M. Fialka, Darren H. Freed, Jayan Nagendran

Bibliographic record

VenueCells · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreTranslational Research in OncologyUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung transplantationLungEconomic shortageInflammationTransplantationPathophysiologyReperfusion injuryInternal medicineIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lung transplantation (LTx) is the gold standard treatment for end-stage lung disease; however, waitlist mortality remains high due to a shortage of suitable donor lungs. Organ quality can be compromised by lung ischemic reperfusion injury (LIRI). LIRI causes pulmonary endothelial inflammation and may lead to primary graft dysfunction (PGD). PGD is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality post-LTx. Research into preservation strategies that decrease the risk of LIRI and PGD is needed, and ex-situ lung perfusion (ESLP) is the foremost technological advancement in this field. This review addresses three major topics in the field of LTx: first, we review the clinical manifestation of LIRI post-LTx; second, we discuss the pathophysiology of LIRI that leads to pulmonary endothelial inflammation and PGD; and third, we present the role of ESLP as a therapeutic vehicle to mitigate this physiologic insult, increase the rates of donor organ utilization, and improve patient outcomes.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellsSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207