MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309852469 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.1064785

Impact of sarcopenia on the future liver remnant growth after portal vein embolization and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy in patients with liver cancer: A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4309852469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiang Wang, Anrong Wang, Zhen Li, Ernesto Sparrelid, Torkel B. Brismar

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineHepatectomyPortal vein embolizationInternal medicineLiver regenerationCochrane LibrarySurgeryUrologyGastroenterologyMeta-analysisResection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The impact of sarcopenia on the future liver remnant (FLR) growth after portal vein occlusion, including portal vein embolization (PVE) and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has gained increasing interest. This systematic review aimed to explore whether sarcopenia was associated with insufficient FLR growth after PVE/ALPPS stage-1. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to 05 July 2022. Studies evaluating the influence of sarcopenia on FLR growth after PVE/ALPPS stage-1 in patients with liver cancer were included. A predefined table was used to extract information including the study and patient characteristics, sarcopenia measurement, FLR growth, post-treatment complications and post-hepatectomy liver failure, resection rate. Research quality was evaluated by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Five studies consisting of 609 patients were included in this study, with a sample size ranging from 42 to 306 (median: 90) patients. Only one study was multicenter research. The incidence of sarcopenia differed from 40% to 67% (median: 63%). Skeletal muscle index based on pretreatment computed tomography was the commonly used parameter for sarcopenia evaluation. All included studies showed that sarcopenia impaired the FLR growth after PVE/ALPPS stage-1. However, the association between sarcopenia and post-treatment complications, post-hepatectomy liver failure, and resection rate remains unclear. All studies showed moderate-to-high quality. Conclusions: Sarcopenia seems to be prevalent in patients undergoing PVE/ALPPS and may be a risk factor for impaired liver growth after PVE/ALPPS stage-1 according to currently limited evidence. Systematic review registration: https://inplasy.com/, identifier INPLASY202280038.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207