Talk:Liver transplantation

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TianyiWang93.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Nice
Nice article in The Lancet about transplant outcomes at 3 and 12 months, negative and positive prognostic factors. JFW | T@lk  21:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

How long between donation and transplantation?
One question I hoped this article would answer for me is: What is the maximum length of time between the liver being taken from the doner's body and being transplanted?
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.159.142 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 14 July 2006

Merge Proposal from Living donor liver transplantation
It seems to me that this merge should go through as the Living donor liver transplantation article is directly related to this topic. I would assume getting a liver transplant from a live or deceased donor would involve similiar complications and risks to the recipient. I propose the merge take place 14 days from today. Alan.ca 08:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Finding a Match
Criteria for finding a match should also be put in. Are there special cases, etc?--Hitsuji Kinno 17:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Survival
I would recommend getting a transplant in the USA and being followed up in the UK: JFW |  T@lk  18:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Living related
looks into what determines acceptance for living-related liver transplant. JFW | T@lk  23:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

ALD
reviews the candidacy in alcoholic liver disease. JFW | T@lk  09:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Spelling
This article contains the spellings paediatric and pediatric. I don't know enough about Wikipedia (paedia?) style to know which is preferred in this context or I would fix it myself.

Tex (talk) 20:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

LDLT
- review on LDLT. JFW | T@lk  13:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * - cirrhosis in the graft. Usually (29/48) disease recurrence, sometimes (19/48) other causes. JFW | T@lk  09:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Why was this in intro?
I moved the following section in intro to here, because I don't see why this in notable enough to be placed at the top of this article:

''Francis Chan (born November 3, 1991) is believed to be the youngest liver transplant patient in Australia. He was 2 months old when he underwent two transplant operations 3 days apart at The Children's Hospital at Westmead. ''

If he proves to be the youngest one in the world, perhaps (no offense to Australia meant).Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

"Tobenna Oputa - orical"?
This strange string, supplied by an anonymous contributor, appeared immediately after the References header. I can find only one other relevant occurrence in Google, at, and even that appears to be a crib from Wikipedia. It appears to be vandalism, so I've reverted it. If you know better, or can supply attribution, please revert my revert and add something substantive there as well, to explain the original text! Jonsg (talk) 17:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Removing extraneous comment in the lede
What was the comment about the cost of the operation doing in the lede? Is "expensiveness" an aspect of surgery commonly mentioned so prominently? Oh dear, no. Is it even mentioned in the article itself (which the lede is supposed to reflect)? Nope, except as an aspect of living donor transplantation, which mentions the "economic aspect" of this particular type of liver transplant. Frankly, it seems out of place there, too — added by patriotic Indian editor, possibly? Compare the neutral and factual comment about economics at the very end of Heart transplantation. That's the way to do these things. Well, I'll refrain from meddling with that (the tone of the article is a little uncertain throughout, after all), but having it in the lede is plain ridiculous. Bishonen | talk 23:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC).
 * Yes, according to WP:MEDMOS, the cost of a procedure can be mentioned when it is noteworthy and covered by WP:RS. Liver transplant is particularly expensive, so it seems as if it should qualify --Nbauman (talk) 21:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Benefits
the last bulletted sentence in this paragraph is badly written, amenable to two diametricly opposed interpretations. either unos has madated restricted access to cadaveric organs for foreigners, or has limited access to these organs solely to foreigners. while the latter seems highly improbable, the wording does allow for that interpretation. since i'm not absolutely sure which is meant, i'm going to leave it to someone else to provide a clarfication and rewordingToyokuni3 (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Pretreatment of donor organ with antioxidants
Seems to have dramatic benefits according to www.naturalnews.com/039510_liver_transplants_antioxidants_NAC.html Antioxidant doubles liver transplant success rate]. Could mention in the existing 'Preservation of the liver before transplantation' section ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Challenges
... in OLT 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.08.045 (mainly organ allocation and use of split grafts). JFW &#124; T@lk  22:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liver transplantation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091016070501/http://www.surgery.usc.edu/divisions/hep/pediatricsurgeryandtransplant.html to http://www.surgery.usc.edu/divisions/hep/pediatricsurgeryandtransplant.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Bulleted list item
 * Bulleted list item

Removal of dubious content reverted
User:TianyiWang93 added some new content on April 20, which was in deficient English and of doubtful relevance. An IP, reverted some of it, and I myself the rest, with informative edit summaries. TianyiWang has now reverted us both and reinserted the material, without any explanatory edit summaries at all. They are a new user and obviously editing in good faith, but the material is unacceptable in my opinion. Input from others would be appreciated. Bishonen &#124; talk 23:09, 22 April 2018 (UTC).
 * Bishonen, its a studentUser:TianyiWang93, they edited Liver disease as well(which BTW needs a ce)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 01:42, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, I know it's a student, and therefore possibly more or less "forced" to reinsert their content in order to get course credit. I see they have now reverted an admin on Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, too. They do know they have a talkpage — they've edited it — but have not responded in any way. I don't want to leave the content languishing indefinitely while waiting for them here, so I've reverted again, and have also pinged Ian (Wiki Ed) from their page (and now from here as well). Bishonen &#124; talk 16:08, 23 April 2018 (UTC).

Yes, this happened before we had a chance to meet with the student. It became clear that I did not provide enough guidance to students on how to address situations in which the content they prepared was removed. I asked him and other students to express the point they were trying to make in the Talk page. We will soon see if i was clear or not this time. Thanks. TMorata (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Greetings, I am one of the instructors of this course, and while I edit Wikipedia, I am still learning. I think it is unlikely the student understood what is going on, and probably was concerned (even if incorrectly), on the impact of having content removed on his grade. We were alerted thru WikiEdu and will contact the student. Thanks. TMorata (talk) 18:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for coming here, TMorata. You'll be pleased to know that an experienced volunteer, User:Jytdog, has now added an improved version of TianyiWang93's content at the article Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Basically, Jytdog has written new text based on Tianyi's sources. Wikipedia collaboration at its best! Unfortunately, though, the problems at this article seem more intractable, compare the edit summary here. At least, it's certainly far beyond me to fix the text — I don't understand it. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC).

Bishonen, it really was not that hard to copy-edit the stats the student added: "There were 6,729 liver transplant operations in the US in . 95.8% (6449) of donated livers came from dead people, and 4.2% (280) donated livers from living people. Until the end of 2014, there were 14,632 people in the transplant waiting list, and 12,204 cases in the waiting list in active status. However, people have died during waiting time.  In 2014, 1,821 patients died while waiting for a liver transplant.   Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and other diseases affect health, so another 1,290 people were removed from the waiting list. In 2013, 10,504 patient were added to the waiting list. 10,648 cases were added to the waiting list in 2014. 10,640 cases were added to the waiting list in 2015, similar to 2014. 11,340 cases were added in waiting list in 2016."

Feel free to self-revert your reversion with the improved version. Someone will want to look up the date for the first sentence.

That said, TMorata, your students might have a better (less confrontational) experience if they wrote their paragraphs in a sandbox on wiki, and they checked each others' work before they added it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I am not sure how encyclopedic this point data is. Something about trends -- something higher level -- would be more appropriate. Jytdog (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the copyedit, WhatamIdoing but putting all those figures into the article without, as Jytdog says, some higher level discussion doesn't seem ideal, especially as they apply to the US only. It's not what I'd hope to find as a reader who wanted to know about liver transplantation. I was hoping somebody would fix it, but I was far from sure what it ought to be instead, and still am not. Are you, Jytdog? Bishonen &#124; talk 15:56, 24 April 2018 (UTC).
 * I have some similar feelings about it. It's not unreasonable material (especially the number of transplants performed each year), so I wouldn't revert it, but it's not also not something I'd think to add myself.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

It has been a learning experience, thank you everyone. The students in general do not like the Sandbox. I have been communicating with WikiEdu about that. Visual editor (only available when doing the edits?) have a huge appeal. I will make sure to discuss this with future students when teaching. TMorata (talk) 14:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid today User:TianyiWang93 has again reverted their text back in again at both Liver transplantation and Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. We don't want to block students from editing if it can be avoided, obviously, but the way this is going, they're heading for a block. We have to defend the quality of articles. I've mentioned the repetition of the problem on User:TMorata's page, too. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC).

Yes, unfortunately this was before I could meet the student at the class. It became clear that I did not provide the students with enough guidance on how to address situations when the content they contribute is removed. I asked him and other students to express their case in the Talk Pages. Hopefully, that will happen. Thanks. TMorata (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)