Hye-Mee Kwon1, Young-Jin Moon1, Kyeo-Woon Jung1, Yong-Seok Park1, In-Gu Jun1, Seon-Ok Kim2, Jun-Gol Song1, Gyu-Sam Hwang1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Laboratory for Cardiovascular Dynamics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Songpa-gu, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Songpa-gu, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) is predictive of poor graft and patient survival following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Considering the impact of the inflammatory response on graft injury extent following LDLT, we investigated the association between neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and EAD, 1-year graft failure, and mortality following LDLT, and compared it to C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and the Glasgow prognostic score. METHODS: A total of 1960 consecutive adult LDLT recipients (1531/429 as development/validation cohort) were retrospectively evaluated. Cut-offs were derived using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and multivariable regression and Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed. RESULTS: The risk of EAD increased proportionally with increasing NLR, and the NLR AUROC was 0.73, similar to CRP and procalcitonin and higher than the rest. NLR ≥ 2.85 (best cut-off) showed a significantly higher EAD occurrence (20.5% vs 5.8%, P < 0.001), higher 1-year graft failure (8.2% vs 4.9%, log-rank P = 0.009) and higher 1-year mortality (7% vs 4.5%, log-rank P = 0.039). NLR ≥ 2.85 was an independent predictor of EAD (odds ratio, 1.89 [1.26-2.84], P = 0.002) after multivariable adjustment, whereas CRP and procalcitonin were not. Increasing NLR was independently associated with higher 1-year graft failure and mortality (both P < 0.001). Consistent results in the validation cohort strengthened the prognostic value of NLR. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative NLR ≥ 2.85 predicted higher risk of EAD, 1-year graft failure and 1-year mortality following LDLT, and NLR was superior to other parameters, suggesting that preoperative NLR may be a practical index for predicting graft function following LDLT.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) is predictive of poor graft and patient survival following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Considering the impact of the inflammatory response on graft injury extent following LDLT, we investigated the association between neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and EAD, 1-year graft failure, and mortality following LDLT, and compared it to C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and the Glasgow prognostic score. METHODS: A total of 1960 consecutive adult LDLT recipients (1531/429 as development/validation cohort) were retrospectively evaluated. Cut-offs were derived using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and multivariable regression and Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed. RESULTS: The risk of EAD increased proportionally with increasing NLR, and the NLR AUROC was 0.73, similar to CRP and procalcitonin and higher than the rest. NLR ≥ 2.85 (best cut-off) showed a significantly higher EAD occurrence (20.5% vs 5.8%, P < 0.001), higher 1-year graft failure (8.2% vs 4.9%, log-rank P = 0.009) and higher 1-year mortality (7% vs 4.5%, log-rank P = 0.039). NLR ≥ 2.85 was an independent predictor of EAD (odds ratio, 1.89 [1.26-2.84], P = 0.002) after multivariable adjustment, whereas CRP and procalcitonin were not. Increasing NLR was independently associated with higher 1-year graft failure and mortality (both P < 0.001). Consistent results in the validation cohort strengthened the prognostic value of NLR. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative NLR ≥ 2.85 predicted higher risk of EAD, 1-year graft failure and 1-year mortality following LDLT, and NLR was superior to other parameters, suggesting that preoperative NLR may be a practical index for predicting graft function following LDLT.
Authors: Nora Jahn; Maria Theresa Voelker; Sven Laudi; Sebastian Stehr; Stefan Schneeberger; Gerald Brandacher; Elisabeth Sucher; Sebastian Rademacher; Daniel Seehofer; Robert Sucher; Hans Michael Hau Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Shaojun Shi; Eliano Bonaccorsi-Riani; Ivo Schurink; Thierry van den Bosch; Michael Doukas; Karishma A Lila; Henk P Roest; Daela Xhema; Pierre Gianello; Jeroen de Jonge; Monique M A Verstegen; Luc J W van der Laan Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 8.786
Authors: Samantha E Halpern; Dimitrios Moris; Brian I Shaw; Madison K Krischak; Danae G Olaso; Samuel J Kesseli; Kadiyala Ravindra; Lisa M McElroy; Andrew S Barbas Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Jaesik Park; Soo Jin Lim; Ho Joong Choi; Sang Hyun Hong; Chul Soo Park; Jong Ho Choi; Min Suk Chae Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 3.240