MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221015246 · doi:10.1097/xcs.0000000000000079

Improving Outcomes after Allograft Nephrectomy through Use of Preoperative Angiographic Kidney Embolization

2022· article· en· W4221015246 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Surgeons · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNephrectomyBlood lossEmbolizationKidneyKidney transplantationKidney transplant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Allograft nephrectomy (AN) has been associated with considerable perioperative morbidity. We aimed to determine if preoperative angiographic kidney embolization (PAKE) to induce graft thrombosis before AN improves outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed adult kidney transplant alone patients who underwent AN at a single center from 2002 to 2020 and compared perioperative outcomes for patients with and without PAKE. RESULTS: Eighty patients underwent AN, including 54 (67.5%) with PAKE before AN and 26 (32.5%) with AN alone. PAKE was associated with significantly reduced blood loss (PAKE: mean 266 ± 292 mL vs AN alone: 495 ± 689 mL; p = 0.04) and reduced transfusion requirements (PAKE: mean 0.5 ± 0.8 packed red blood cell units vs AN alone: 1.6 ± 2.6 units; p = 0.004) despite similar preoperative hemoglobin levels. Mean operating time (PAKE: 142 ± 43 minutes vs AN alone: 202 ± 111 minutes; p = 0.001) and length of hospital stay (PAKE: 4.3 ± 2.0 days vs AN alone: 9.3 ± 9.4 days; p = 0.0003) also favored PAKE, as did the surgical complication rate (PAKE: 6/54 [11%] vs AN alone: 9/26 [35%], p = 0.02). Long-term patient survival after AN was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: PAKE was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss, fewer transfusions, reduced operating time, shorter length of stay, and fewer surgical complications compared with AN alone at our center.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of SurgeonsSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207