A305 ANONYMOUS LIVING LIVER DONATION IMPROVES ACCESS FOR MEDICALLY UNDERSERVED CHILDREN IN NEED OF LIVER TRANSPLANTATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Since our first pediatric anonymous non-directed live donor liver transplant (A-LDLT) performed in April 2005, 62 children have undergone live donor liver transplant (LDLT) with an anonymous non-directed graft. Anon-LDLT organs being allocated as per our deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) wait list. Aims To evaluate clinical outcomes, recipient characteristics and social determinants of health of pediatric recipients of A-LDLT in comparison to those who received a directed LDLT (Dir-LDLT) and DDLT. Methods Retrospective analysis of all recipients of LDLT performed between January 2005 and March 2023. Demographic and clinical data included age, sex, race, ethnicity, single-parent households, primary diagnosis, recipient blood type, time on waiting list, post-LT intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), time to extubation, and post-transplant comorbidities were assessed as covariates. A comparative analysis was conducted between children receiving A-LDLT, Dir-LDLT versus DDLT. Results A total of 422 (50% male, 57% white, 23% Asian, 7% Black, 5% indigenous) childrenunderwent LT during the study period. Biliary atresia (40%) and metabolic diseases (19%) were the commonest primary indications. A-LDLT was done in 62 children (15%) with no directed donor options. Dir-LDLT was in 174 children (41%). Of 186 DDLTs (44%), 25% were split grafts, 26% reduced, and 49% whole liver grafts. In A-LDLT recipients, the primary diseases were more frequently characterized by metabolic disorders (31%), while the incidence of acute liver failure was notably lower (0%). Recipients of Anon-LDLT were more often Indigenous recipients in comparison to Dir-LDLT or DDLT recipients (p=0.044). Anon-LDLT recipients were more frequently living in single parent households (18% vs 3% vs 10%, pampersand:003C0.001) and to require interpreter assistance (11% vs 3% vs 0.5%, pampersand:003C0.001) (Table), compared to children who received Dir-LDLT or DDLT. Median time on the wait list was longer for Anon-LDLT (92 days) compared to Dir-LDLT (62 days) and DDLT (72 days) recipients (p=0.004). Post-LT ICU LOS, time to extubation, other post-LT complications or patient prognosis were better in the A-LDLT and Dir-LDLT recipients than DDLT recipients. Conclusions This retrospective analysis of 422 children undergoing LT at a single institution confirms excellent patient and graft survival for A-LDLT recipients. Patients from Indigenous communities, single parent and households where English is a second language, are more frequently the beneficiaries of Anon-LDLT grafts. Anon-LDLT, as utilized in this single center analysis, benefits medically underserved pediatric patients who otherwise have limited access to the advantages of LT. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".