Literature DB >> 24022434

The evolution of liver transplantation during 3 decades: analysis of 5347 consecutive liver transplants at a single center.

Vatche G Agopian1, Henrik Petrowsky, Fady M Kaldas, Ali Zarrinpar, Douglas G Farmer, Hasan Yersiz, Curtis Holt, Michael Harlander-Locke, Johnny C Hong, Abbas R Rana, Robert Venick, Sue V McDiarmid, Leonard I Goldstein, Francisco Durazo, Sammy Saab, Steven Han, Victor Xia, Jonathan R Hiatt, Ronald W Busuttil.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze a 28-year single-center experience with orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for patients with irreversible liver failure.
BACKGROUND: The implementation of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in 2002 represented a fundamental shift in liver donor allocation to recipients with the highest acuity, raising concerns about posttransplant outcome and morbidity.
METHODS: Outcomes and factors affecting survival were analyzed in 5347 consecutive OLTs performed in 3752 adults and 822 children between 1984 and 2012, including comparisons of recipient and donor characteristics, graft and patient outcomes, and postoperative morbidity before (n = 3218) and after (n = 2129) implementation of the MELD allocation system. Independent predictors of survival were identified.
RESULTS: Overall, 1-, 5-, 10-, and 20-year patient and graft survival estimates were 82%, 70%, 63%, 52%, and 73%, 61%, 54%, 43%, respectively. Recipient survival was best in children with biliary atresia and worst in adults with malignancy. Post-MELD era recipients were older (54 vs 49, P < 0.001), more likely to be hospitalized (50% vs 47%, P = 0.026) and receiving pretransplant renal replacement therapy (34% vs 12%, P < 0.001), and had significantly greater laboratory MELD scores (28 vs 19, P < 0.001), longer wait-list times (270 days vs 186 days, P < 0.001), and pretransplant hospital stays (10 days vs 8 days, P < 0.001). Despite increased acuity, post-MELD era recipients achieved superior 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival (82%, 70%, and 65% vs 77%, 66%, and 58%, P < 0.001) and graft survival (78%, 66%, and 61% vs 69%, 58%, and 51%, P < 0.001) compared with pre-MELD recipients. Of 17 recipient and donor variables, era of transplantation, etiology of liver disease, recipient and donor age, prior transplantation, MELD score, hospitalization at time of OLT, and cold and warm ischemia time were independent predictors of survival.
CONCLUSIONS: We present the world's largest reported single-institution experience with OLT. Despite increasing acuity in post-MELD era recipients, patient and graft survival continues to improve, justifying the "sickest first" allocation approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24022434     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a15db4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  51 in total

1.  20-year survival post-liver transplant: much more is needed!

Authors:  Russell Strong; Jonathan Fawcett
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2015-03-29       Impact factor: 6.047

2.  Graft Reconditioning before Liver Transplantation.

Authors:  Dieter P Hoyer; Thomas Minor
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2016-07-29

3.  Outcomes of liver transplantation for end-stage biliary disease: A comparative study with end-stage liver disease.

Authors:  Yan-Hua Lai; Wei-Dong Duan; Qiang Yu; Sheng Ye; Nian-Jun Xiao; Dong-Xin Zhang; Zhi-Qiang Huang; Zhan-Yu Yang; Jia-Hong Dong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Pretransplant diabetes mellitus predicts worse outcomes of liver transplantation: evidence from meta-analysis.

Authors:  P Li; H Fan; Q He
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 4.256

5.  Population pharmacokinetics of enoxaparin in early stage of paediatric liver transplantation.

Authors:  Mehdi Oualha; Christophe Chardot; Dominique Debray; Fabrice Lesage; Annie Harroche; Sylvain Renolleau; Jean-Marc Treluyer; Saïk Urien
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-03-23       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 6.  Keys to long-term care of the liver transplant recipient.

Authors:  Kymberly D Watt
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 7.  Laparoscopic liver resection for living donation: where do we stand?

Authors:  François Cauchy; Lilian Schwarz; Olivier Scatton; Olivier Soubrane
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 8.  Coagulopathy and transfusion therapy in pediatric liver transplantation.

Authors:  Mirco Nacoti; Davide Corbella; Francesco Fazzi; Francesca Rapido; Ezio Bonanomi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Informational needs of liver transplant recipients during a two-year posttransplant period.

Authors:  Dami Ko; Insook Lee; Rebecca J Muehrer
Journal:  Chronic Illn       Date:  2015-08-18

10.  Long-term outcome of patients undergoing liver transplantation for mixed hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma: an analysis of the UNOS database.

Authors:  Valery Vilchez; Malay B Shah; Michael F Daily; Luis Pena; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Daniel Davenport; Peter J Hosein; Roberto Gedaly; Erin Maynard
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 3.647

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.