MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390536086 · doi:10.12659/aot.941054

Cyclosporine A Does Not Mitigate Liver Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury in an Ex Vivo Porcine Model of Donation After Circulatory Death

2023· article· en· W4390536086 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua Hefler, Sanaz Hatami, Aducio Thiesen, Mitchell J. Wagner, Guilherme Mainardi Aguiar da Silva, Sayed Himmat, Constantine Karvellas, David L. Bigam, Darren H. Freed, A. M. James Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Transplantation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEx vivoMedicineReperfusion injuryIschemiaLiver transplantationPerfusionTransplantationMachine perfusionLactate dehydrogenaseIn vivoAnesthesiaCold storageSurgeryInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI) is an inherent problem in organ transplantation, owing to the obligate period of ischemia that organs must endure. Cyclosporine A (CsA), though better know as an immunosuppressant, has been shown to mitigate warm IRI in a variety of organ types, including the liver. However, there is little evidence for CsA in preventing hepatic IRI in the transplant setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS In the present study, we tested the effect of CsA on hepatic IRI in a large-animal ex vivo model of donation after circulatory death (DCD). Porcine donors were pre-treated with either normal saline control or 20 mg/kg of CsA. Animals were subject to either 45 or 60 minutes of warm ischemia before hepatectomy, followed by 2 or 4 hours of cold storage prior to reperfusion on an ex vivo circuit. Over the course of a 12-hour perfusion, perfusion parameters were recorded and perfusate samples and biopsies were taken at regular intervals. RESULTS Peak perfusate lactate dehydrogenase was significantly decreased in the lower-ischemia group treated with CsA compared to the untreated group (4220 U/L [3515-5815] vs 11 305 [10 100-11 674]; P=0.023). However, no difference was seen between controls and CsA-treated groups on other parameters in perfusate alanine or asparagine aminotransferase (P=0.912, 0.455, respectively). Correspondingly, we found no difference on midpoint histological injury score (P=0.271). CONCLUSIONS We found minimal evidence that CsA is protective against hepatic IRI in our DCD model.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venueAnnals of TransplantationSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207