Superior cardiac protection in combined ex-situ perfusion of heart and liver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Normothermic ex-situ heart perfusion has helped expand the heart donor pool however, it is not optimized yet. Experimental ex-situ organ perfusion incorporating cross-circulation with a live animal has achieved significantly longer safe ex-situ preservation times; however, the underlying mechanisms are not clear. METHODS: In this study, combined ex-situ heart-liver perfusion of porcine hearts was compared to ex-situ isolated heart perfusion. Discarded human donor hearts were also perfused ex-situ and cardiac function and metabolism was studied. RESULTS: The hearts perfused together with liver were preserved significantly better, with lower edema, preserved key nutrients, and lower oxidative stress, (comparable to in vivo samples). Human donor hearts subjected to ex-situ perfusion had similar function and oxidative patterns compared to isolated porcine hearts, suggesting these hearts are vulnerable to the same phenomena as porcine hearts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that efficient antioxidant and energy metabolite support is necessary for improving the functional preservation of the donor heart during ex-situ perfusion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".