214.8: Pancreas Transplantation From Cardiac Death Donors Versus Neurological Death Donors at a Tertiary Care Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Pancreas transplantation is the only curative treatment for patients with complicated diabetes. Donor organ shortages and strict organ allocation policies are rate limiting factors that limit potential recipients from receiving a graft. The pancreas is also the most discarded organ for transplantation further limiting suitable grafts for transplant. To meet the demands of the organ shortage, expanding the criteria for suitable pancreas donors has been explored. The program in Toronto has been using donation by cardiac death (DCD) pancreas donors for over a decade. Methods: A retrospective study of all DCD cases (n=33) performed at Toronto General Hospital from January 2011 to December 2020 were matched 1:3 with NDD cases (96) for a total of 129 pancreas transplantations. All statistical analysis and graphs were performed using GraphPad Prism 9 software. Continuous data are presented as mean and standard deviations, categorical data as total numbers and percentages and Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate patient and graft survival. A significant P value was set to ≤0.05. Results: Patient demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. In both groups, the majority of the recipients were male (DCD 81.81% vs NDD 61.45%). Major cause of death was anoxia in both groups and DM1 was the principal diagnosis in pancreas allograft recipients. Simultaneous Pancreas Kidney transplantation was the most common procedure performed (DCD 87.9% vs NDD 87.6%). Graft failure and mortality were comparable between recipients of DCD and DBD grafts (p = 0.21 and p=0.42, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in graft and patient survival for 1, 5 and 8 years between groups (Figure 1). Conclusion: Our data suggests there is no difference in outcomes in recipients of grafts from DCD versus DBD donors. The use of DCD grafts is safe and feasible and should be encouraged to become a standard practice to meet the increasing waiting times and number of patients in need of a pancreas allograft.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".