MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

394: OUTCOMES OF ACUTE LIVER FAILURE PATIENTS NOT LISTED FOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION: A COHORT ANALYSIS

2023· article· en· W4389730370 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Dong, Valerie Durkalski, William M. Lee, Constantine Karvellas

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLiver transplantationCohortLiver failureCohort studyTransplantationInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Acute liver failure (ALF) is a rare condition leading to intensive care unit admission and significant morbidity and mortality. Liver transplantation (LT) is often required as a life saving measure. However patients are not always listed for LT and there is lack of data around the outcomes of such patients. Our aim is to describe outcomes of ALF patients not listed for LT and identify factors associated with death at 21 days. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all ALF patients not listed for LT enrolled in the US Acute Liver Failure Study Group (US-ALFSG) registry between 1998 and 2018. Primary outcome was death at 21 days. Patients deceased at 21 days were compared to those alive at 21 days. Multivariable logistic regression was done to identify factors associated with death at 21 days. Results: 1672 ALF patients were not listed for LT. Median age was 41 [Interquartile Range (IQR) 30-54] and 527 (31.5%) were male. 371 (28.9%) patients were too sick to list. Most common etiology was acetaminophen toxicity (54.8%). 330 (19.7%) patients met King’s College Criteria (KCC) for LT. Median ALFSG Prognostic Index (ALFSG-PI) was 38% (IQR 13.2%-71.5%) chance of spontaneous survival. 951 (56.9%) patients required mechanical ventilation, 564 (33.7%) needed vasopressors, and 246 (14.7%) required continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). 558 (35.7%) patients died at 21 days. Compared to those who survived, patients who died were more likely to be too sick for listing (56.8% vs 15.5%), have a non-acetaminophen etiology (62.7% vs 36.9%), fulfil KCC (41.4% vs 9.2%), have lower ALFSG-PI (11.4% vs 53.9%), need mechanical ventilation (78.9% vs 46.2%), need vasopressors (61.6% vs 19.5%), and need CRRT (20.3% vs 13%) (p< 0.05 for all). After adjusting for relevant covariates, age [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.04], KCC (aOR 3.17, CI 2.23-4.51), grade 3/4 encephalopathy (aOR 1.83, CI 1.18-2.83), mechanical ventilation (aOR 1.53, CI 1.01-2.33), and vasopressors (aOR 2.10, CI 1.43-3.08) (p< 0.05 for all) were all independently associated with death at 21 days. Conclusions: Despite no LT, majority of patients were still alive at 21 days. Multiorgan failure resulting in grade 3/4 encephalopathy, need for mechanical ventilation, and need for vasopressors lead to poor prognosis.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care Medicine→Same topicLiver Disease and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→