MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376141301 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znad101.004

O004 Impact of normothermic regional perfusion on recipient outcomes after simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation – a UK analysis from the NHSBT Pancreas Advisory Group

2023· article· en· W4376141301 on OpenAlexaff
Ruth Owen, C Counter, Samuel J Tingle, L. Simmonds, Chris Callaghan, John Casey, I.C. Currie, M Drage, D Elker, Derek Manas, Anand Muthusamy, Gabriel C. Oniscu, Gavin J. Pettigrew, Smita Sinha, Andrew Sutherland, D Van Dellen, Christopher J.E. Watson, Colin Wilson, Steven A. White

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPancreas Centre (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePancreas transplantationPerfusionPancreasTransplantationUnivariate analysisKidneySurgeryUrologyKidney transplantationInternal medicineMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction A quarter of UK SPK transplants are from Deceased Cardiac Donors(DCD), with an increasing number recovered following in-situ normothermic regional perfusion(NRP). The aim of this study was to review the UK experience of SPK transplantation following NRP in DCD. Methods Data were collected on all first DCD SPKTs(n=360) performed during 2013–2021 from the UK Transplant Registry. Non-NRP DCD SPK were compared to NRP DCD SPKs. Kaplan Meier plots and cox regression analyses were performed. Results Some 198 pancreas were offered from NRP donors with 83 being retrieved. The majority of SPK grafts were from nonNRP donors n=324(90.0%) with n=36(10.0%) from NRP donors. The median cold ischaemic time (CIT) from NRP donors (9.7 hours) was significantly less than nonNRP donors (10.2 hours) (p=0.013). For all other parameters, donors were well matched. Recipients who received a graft from an NRP donor were also well matched with the recipients who received a graft from a nonNRP donor. Univariate analysis showed no statistically significant difference in one-year pancreas graft (NRP 97.2%, non-NRP 89.2%, p=0.145), kidney graft (NRP 100%, nonNRP 95.9%, p=0.221) or patient survival (NRP 100%, nonNRP 98.3%, p=0.442) despite an increasing trend in favour of NRP SPK. Conclusions This is the largest reported analysis of NRP for SPK transplants to date. NRP has previously been shown to be beneficial for liver transplants. Despite some concerns that NRP may preferentially benefit the liver at the expense of other organs our study has shown no adverse effects. Larger studies are needed to evaluate whether NRP improves graft utilisation rates for SPK.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207