Liver retransplants using living donors: An approach for management

Q2 Medicine
Hasan Al Harakeh, Christopher Hughes, Amit Tevar, Vikram Gunabushanam, Eishan Ashwat, Hao Liu, Abhinav Humar
{"title":"Liver retransplants using living donors: An approach for management","authors":"Hasan Al Harakeh,&nbsp;Christopher Hughes,&nbsp;Amit Tevar,&nbsp;Vikram Gunabushanam,&nbsp;Eishan Ashwat,&nbsp;Hao Liu,&nbsp;Abhinav Humar","doi":"10.1016/j.livres.2023.09.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and aims</h3><p>Many centers do not offer living donor transplants for patients in need of a liver retransplant. We aimed to study our liver retransplant outcomes using living donors and compared them with those of retransplants performed using deceased donors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study retrospectively analyzed all retransplants performed at our center between 2009 and 2023, and outcomes of living donor retransplants were compared with deceased donor retransplants using standard statistical tests.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Between January 2009 and March 2023, a total of 77 retransplants, 60 with deceased donors and 17 with living donors, were performed. Important demographic differences between the two groups included a higher model for end-stage liver disease score in the deceased donor group (32.1 ± 6.1 <em>vs</em>. 19.4 ± 5.7, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001) and a higher number of early retransplants (within 3 months of the initial transplant), which accounted for 35% of deceased donor transplants but 0 of living donor transplants (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.01). Overall, the patient and graft survival rates were comparable between the two groups. The patient survival rates at 1 and 3 years after transplant were 73% and 67% in the deceased donor group and 84% and 73% in the living donor group, respectively (<em>P</em> = 0.57). The hospital length of stay and blood product use were both better in the living donor group. Biliary complications did not show significant different between the two groups (<em>P</em> = 0.33).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Living donors can provide acceptable outcomes for those in need of a retransplant, with results comparable to those seen with deceased donors. A systematic approach to the patient in the pre-, peri-, and post-transplantation period is important in these complicated cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36741,"journal":{"name":"Liver Research","volume":"7 3","pages":"Pages 252-255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254256842300048X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims

Many centers do not offer living donor transplants for patients in need of a liver retransplant. We aimed to study our liver retransplant outcomes using living donors and compared them with those of retransplants performed using deceased donors.

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed all retransplants performed at our center between 2009 and 2023, and outcomes of living donor retransplants were compared with deceased donor retransplants using standard statistical tests.

Results

Between January 2009 and March 2023, a total of 77 retransplants, 60 with deceased donors and 17 with living donors, were performed. Important demographic differences between the two groups included a higher model for end-stage liver disease score in the deceased donor group (32.1 ± 6.1 vs. 19.4 ± 5.7, P < 0.001) and a higher number of early retransplants (within 3 months of the initial transplant), which accounted for 35% of deceased donor transplants but 0 of living donor transplants (P < 0.01). Overall, the patient and graft survival rates were comparable between the two groups. The patient survival rates at 1 and 3 years after transplant were 73% and 67% in the deceased donor group and 84% and 73% in the living donor group, respectively (P = 0.57). The hospital length of stay and blood product use were both better in the living donor group. Biliary complications did not show significant different between the two groups (P = 0.33).

Conclusions

Living donors can provide acceptable outcomes for those in need of a retransplant, with results comparable to those seen with deceased donors. A systematic approach to the patient in the pre-, peri-, and post-transplantation period is important in these complicated cases.

使用活体供体进行肝脏再移植:一种管理方法
背景和目的任何中心都不为需要再次肝移植的患者提供活体供体移植。我们旨在研究使用活体捐赠者进行的肝脏再移植结果,并将其与使用已故捐赠者进行的再移植结果进行比较。方法本研究回顾性分析了2009年至2023年间在我们中心进行的所有再移植,并使用标准统计检验将活体供体再移植与已故供体再移植的结果进行了比较。结果2009年1月至2023年3月,共进行了77例再移植,其中60例为已故捐赠者,17例为活体捐赠者。两组之间的重要人口统计学差异包括已故供体组的终末期肝病评分较高(32.1±6.1 vs.19.4±5.7,P<;0.001),以及早期再移植次数较高(在首次移植后3个月内),占已故供体移植的35%,但占活供体移植的0(P<;0.01)。总体而言,两组患者和移植物的存活率相当。移植后1年和3年的患者存活率在已故供体组分别为73%和67%,在活体供体组分别是84%和73%(P=0.57)。活体供体组的住院时间和血液制品使用情况都更好。两组的胆道并发症没有显著差异(P=0.33)。结论活体捐赠者可以为需要再次移植的人提供可接受的结果,其结果与已故捐赠者的结果相当。在这些复杂的病例中,在移植前、移植周和移植后对患者进行系统的治疗是很重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Liver Research
Liver Research Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信