Literature DB >> 24764678

Living-donor or deceased-donor liver transplantation for hepatic carcinoma: a case-matched comparison.

Ping Wan1, Jian-Jun Zhang1, Qi-Gen Li1, Ning Xu1, Ming Zhang1, Xiao-Song Chen1, Long-Zhi Han1, Qiang Xia1.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the surgical outcomes between living-donor and deceased-donor liver transplantation in patients with hepatic carcinoma.
METHODS: From January 2007 to December 2010, 257 patients with pathologically confirmed hepatic carcinoma met the eligibility criteria of the study. Forty patients who underwent living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) constituted the LDLT group, and deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) was performed in 217 patients. Patients in the LDLT group were randomly matched (1:2) to patients who underwent DDLT using a multivariate case-matched method, so 40 patients in the LDLT group and 80 patients in the DDLT group were enrolled into the study. We compared the two groups in terms of clinicopathological characteristics, postoperative complications, long-term cumulative survival and relapse-free survival outcomes. The modified Clavien-Dindo classification system of surgical complications was used to evaluate the severity of perioperative complications. Furthermore, we determined the difference in the overall biliary complication rates in the perioperative and follow-up periods between the LDLT and DDLT groups.
RESULTS: The clinicopathological characteristics of the enrolled patients were comparable between the two groups. The duration of operation was significantly longer (553 min vs 445 min, P < 0.001) in the LDLT group than in the DDLT group. Estimated blood loss (1188 mL vs 1035 mL, P = 0.055) and the proportion of patients with intraoperative transfusion (60.0% vs 43.8%, P = 0.093) were slightly but not significantly greater in the LDLT group. In contrast to DDLT, LDLT was associated with a lower rate of perioperative grade II complications (45.0% vs 65.0%, P = 0.036) but a higher risk of overall biliary complications (27.5% vs 7.5%, P = 0.003). Nonetheless, 21 patients (52.5%) in the LDLT group and 46 patients (57.5%) in the DDLT group experienced perioperative complications, and overall perioperative complication rates were similar between the two groups (P = 0.603). No significant difference was observed in 5-year overall survival (74.1% vs 66.6%, P = 0.372) or relapse-free survival (72.9% vs 70.9%, P = 0.749) between the LDLT and DDLT groups.
CONCLUSION: Although biliary complications were more common in the LDLT group, this group did not show any inferiority in long-term overall survival or relapse-free survival compared with DDLT.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complication; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Liver cancer; Liver transplantation; Living donor; Recurrence; Survival

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24764678      PMCID: PMC3989976          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i15.4393

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  32 in total

1.  POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit.

Authors:  G P Copeland; D Jones; M Walters
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Is the pathologic TNM staging system for patients with hepatoma predictive of outcome?

Authors:  J W Marsh; I Dvorchik; C A Bonham; S Iwatsuki
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation for early irresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  C M Lo; S T Fan; C L Liu; S C Chan; I O-L Ng; J Wong
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Global cancer statistics, 2002.

Authors:  D Max Parkin; Freddie Bray; J Ferlay; Paola Pisani
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States.

Authors:  H B El-Serag; A C Mason
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-03-11       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Wait and transplant for stage 2 hepatocellular carcinoma with deceased-donor liver grafts.

Authors:  See Ching Chan; William W Sharr; Kenneth S H Chok; Albert C Y Chan; Chung Mau Lo
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2013-12-15       Impact factor: 4.939

7.  Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplant: patterns and prognosis.

Authors:  Sasan Roayaie; Jonathan D Schwartz; Max W Sung; Sukru H Emre; Charles M Miller; Gabriel E Gondolesi; Nancy R Krieger; Myron E Schwartz
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.799

8.  Partial hepatectomy accelerates local tumor growth: potential roles of local cytokine activation.

Authors:  A Picardo; H M Karpoff; B Ng; J Lee; M F Brennan; Y Fong
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

Authors:  Daniel Dindo; Nicolas Demartines; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis.

Authors:  V Mazzaferro; E Regalia; R Doci; S Andreola; A Pulvirenti; F Bozzetti; F Montalto; M Ammatuna; A Morabito; L Gennari
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-03-14       Impact factor: 176.079

View more
  6 in total

1.  Transplantation for EASL-CLIF and APASL acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) patients: The TEA cohort to evaluate long-term post-Transplant outcomes.

Authors:  Lei Xia; Zi-Yun Qiao; Zi-Jie Zhang; Zi-Cheng Lv; Huan Tong; Ying Tong; Hao-Xiang Wu; Xiao-Song Chen; Han-Yong Sun; Jian-Jun Zhang; Wolfgang Ervin Thasler; Hao Feng; Qiang Xia
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2022-06-04

Review 2.  Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: an (almost) exclusive Eastern procedure?

Authors:  Rafael S Pinheiro; Daniel R Waisberg; Lucas S Nacif; Vinicius Rocha-Santos; Rubens M Arantes; Liliana Ducatti; Rodrigo B Martino; Quirino Lai; Wellington Andraus; Luiz A C D'Albuquerque
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-08-29

Review 3.  Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: outcomes and novel surgical approaches.

Authors:  Gonzalo Sapisochin; Jordi Bruix
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 46.802

4.  Meta-analysis and meta-regression of outcomes for adult living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation.

Authors:  Arianna Barbetta; Mayada Aljehani; Michelle Kim; Christine Tien; Aaron Ahearn; Hannah Schilperoort; Linda Sher; Juliet Emamaullee
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 9.369

5.  Increased Surgical Complications but Improved Overall Survival with Adult Living Donor Compared to Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wei Tang; Jian-Guo Qiu; Yang Cai; Luo Cheng; Cheng-You Du
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in living and deceased donor liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hai-Ming Zhang; Yue-Xian Shi; Li-Ying Sun; Zhi-Jun Zhu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 2.628

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.