Chronic Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Recurrent Cholangitis in Liver Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the use of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) on the prevention of recurrent biliary tract infection (BTI) in liver transplant recipients (LTR). Methods A single‐center retrospective case series study from 2009 to 2023 was conducted to assess the effect of AP on the prevention of recurrent BTI in LTR. Results A total of 15 patients who underwent liver transplantation (LT) were evaluated and treated with a prolonged course of AP (mean 77 months). Ten of fifteen (66.6%) patients experienced resolution of episodes of BTI while on AP. Three additional patents noted a marked decrease in the frequency of recurrent BTI. The AP was well tolerated with few adverse events. A rescue antibiotic strategy was provided for each patient on AP in case of breakthrough infection. Conclusion Prolonged AP appears to be an efficacious and safe method to prevent recurrent BTI in LTR, reducing admissions to the hospital. This approach requires more rigorous testing in a randomized clinical trial.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".