Padronização da captação de útero e cirurgia de bancada de doadora falecida para transplante
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction:In most places of the world, adoption is the only option for couples with exclusive uterine factor infertility.A few countries have permission to use gestational surrogacy as an option for reproduction and genetic transmission.Another alternative is a uterus transplant with subsequent insemination of a previously formed embryo.However, there are few reports of success available, and the surgical technique is not yet well established.Objective: This study was performed to develop and standardize a surgical technique for uterus retrieval and back table in a braindead organ donor.Methods: This is a prospective study, performed at HCFMUSP and Clinica Imbanco -Colombia, from August 2016 to July 2019.15 uterus retrievals surgeries from multiple organ donor patients were performed, in addition to 10 complete back table surgeries.This study received the approval from both institution's ethics committee, as well as authorization from the transplant center and from the donor's relatives.Results: Improvement of the surgical technique, less manipulation of the uterine vascular pedicles, and reduction of ischemia time, achieving greater compliance with the vaginal cuff, being 2 of 15 organs used for uterine transplantation, one of them successful, obtaining a live healthy female at birth.Conclusion: The standardization of the technique of uterus retrieval from multiple organ donors allowed the appropriate preservation of the vascular grafts.Its replication is feasible, making possible the use of a uterus from a deceased donor for transplantation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".