MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391886466 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwad061.279

A279 WHY LIVER TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS DIE: A QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW

2024· article· en· W4391886466 on OpenAlexaff
N Aboalfaraj, Radomír Taláb, Vladimir Marquez, Daljeet Chahal, Trana Hussaini, M Dmitriew, Eric M. Yoshida

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacy and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality assuranceDie (integrated circuit)MedicineLiver transplantationIntensive care medicineInternal medicineEngineeringTransplantationMechanical engineeringPathologyExternal quality assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Liver transplant techniques have significantly advanced over time, enhancing patient survival rates. In 2022, 99 liver transplants were performed in British Columbia (BC), ranking second in organ transplants. In BC, mortality rates for liver transplant recipients are 9.4% at one year, 15.6% at three years, 21% at five years, and 31% at ten years. However, a knowledge gap exists about the causes of post-transplant deaths in BC. This study aims to explore the primary mortality causes among these recipients over the last decade. Aims This study aims to investigate the leading causes of mortality among liver transplant recipients in British Columbia between 2013 and 2023. The objective is to identify areas for improvement and to develop strategies to decrease mortality rates. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational study including all patient deaths among liver transplant recipients in BC between January 1, 2013, to August 31, 2023. Secondary data from the BC Transplant database were used for this analysis. Results Over a ten-year period, 320 deaths were recorded in liver transplant recipients in BC. On average, patients were 53.5±12.96 years. Additionally, 60% of these individuals were male. Deaths occurred, on average, 8.6 ± 8.05 years after the patients received their transplants. Malignancy emerged as the primary cause of death, representing 24.7% of all fatalities. Together, multi-organ failure (12.5%), sepsis (11.3%), and cardiovascular issues (6.9%) made up close to one-third of the total deaths. Thirty-one patients (9.7%) died due to liver-related causes. The most common causes of graft loss were hepatitis C recurrence (6/31) and allograft rejection (8/31). Unfortunately, the cause of death was unknown in a significant proportion of patients (67/320), with nearly one-third (10/31) of all liver-related mortalities lacking a clear documented etiology. Conclusions Our study elucidated the causes of death in liver transplant recipients in British Columbia over the past decade. Cancer-related mortality, multi-organ failure, sepsis, cardiovascular events, and liver allograft failure were among the most common causes of death in this patient population. Hepatitis C recurrence and allograft rejection were common etiologies for liver-related mortality. The significant proportion of patients with undetermined or undocumented causes of death is of concern. These findings underscore the necessity for enhanced oncological surveillance, rigorous patient evaluation, and a potential re-evaluation of post-transplant care, especially in managing infections and cardiovascular health. The substantial "unknown" causes of death emphasize a need for better data capture provincially. 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicPharmacy and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207