ArticleScientific reports2024
Prediction of early recovery of graft function after living donor liver transplantation in children.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in transplantation surgery care pathway.World journal of transplantation · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For end-stage liver disease in children, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is often the important standard curative treatment. However, there is a lack of research on early recovery of graft function after pediatric LDLT. This is a single-center, ambispective cohort study. We collected the demographic and clinicopathological data of donors and recipients, and determined the risk factors of postoperative delayed recovery of hepatic function (DRHF) by univariate and multivariate Logistic analyses. 181 cases were included in the retrospective cohort and 50 cases in the prospective cohort. The incidence of DRHF after LDLT in children was 29.4%, and DRHF could well evaluate the early recovery of graft function after LDLT. Through Logistic analyses and AIC score, preoperative liver function of donors, ischemia duration level of the liver graft, Ln (Cr of recipients before operation) and Ln (TB of recipients on the 3rd day after operation) were predictive indicators for DRHF after LDLT in children. Using the above factors, we constructed a predictive model to evaluate the incidence of postoperative DRHF. Self-verification and prospective internal verification showed that this prediction model had good accuracy and clinical applicability. In conclusion, we pointed many risk factors for early delayed recovery of graft function after LDLT in children, and developed a visual and personalized predictive model for them, offering valuable insights for clinical management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.