MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292212789 · doi:10.1002/lt.26563

Outcomes of patients with acute liver failure listed for liver transplantation: A multicenter prospective cohort analysis

2022· article· en· W4292212789 on OpenAlexafffund
Constantine Karvellas, Thomas M. Leventhal, Jorge Rakela, Jingwen Zhang, Valerie Durkalski, K. Rajender Reddy, Robert J. Fontana, R. Todd Stravitz, John R. Lake, William M. Lee, Justin Parekh

Bibliographic record

VenueLiver Transplantation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersBaylor University Medical CenterUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of California, San DiegoUniversity of OregonUniversity of PittsburghUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of South CarolinaNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesBaylor UniversityYale UniversityVirginia Commonwealth UniversityNorthwestern UniversityOhio State UniversityUniversity of WashingtonEmory UniversityUniversity of PennsylvaniaMassachusetts General Hospital
KeywordsMedicineLiver transplantationInternal medicineOdds ratioCohortProspective cohort studyTransplantationConfidence intervalSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving treatment for patients with acute liver failure (ALF). Currently, there are few detailed data regarding long-term outcomes after LT for ALF. We combined prospective data from the Acute Liver Failure Study Group (ALFSG) Registry with those of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) to assess outcomes among consecutive patients with ALF listed for LT. Cohort analysis of detailed pretransplantation data for patients listed for LT for ALF in the ALFSG Registry between January 1998 and October 2018 matched with transplantation-related data from the SRTR. Primary outcomes were 1- and 3-year post-LT patient survival. Secondary outcome was receipt of LT; independent associations with successful receipt of LT were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Of 624 patients with ALF listed for LT, 398 (64%) underwent LT, 100 (16%) died without LT, and 126 (20%) recovered spontaneously. Among LT recipients, etiologies included seronegative/indeterminate (22%), drug-induced liver injury (18%), acetaminophen overdose (APAP; 16%), and viral hepatitis (15%). The 1- and 3-year post-LT patient survival rates were 91% and 90%, respectively. Comparing those dying on the waiting list versus with those who received LT, the former had more severe multiorgan failure, reflected by increased vasopressor use (65% vs. 22%), mechanical ventilation (84% vs. 57%), and renal replacement therapy (57% vs. 30%; p < 0.0001 for all). After adjusting for relevant covariates, age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.04), APAP etiology (aOR 2.72, 95% CI 1.42-5.23), requirement for vasopressors (aOR 4.19, 95% CI 2.44-7.20), Grade III/IV hepatic encephalopathy (aOR 2.47, 95% CI 1.29-4.72), and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.09; p < 0.05 for all) were independently associated with death without receipt of LT. Post-LT outcomes for ALF are excellent in this cohort of very ill patients. The development of multiorgan failure while on the transplantation list and APAP ALF etiology were associated with a lower likelihood of successful receipt of LT.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations76
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiver TransplantationSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207