重新审视死亡供体肝移植中供体与受体大小不匹配的预后影响。

IF 1.9 Q3 TRANSPLANTATION
Transplantation Direct Pub Date : 2024-10-18 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1097/TXD.0000000000001722
Toshihiro Nakayama, Miho Akabane, Yuki Imaoka, Carlos O Esquivel, Marc L Melcher, Kazunari Sasaki
{"title":"重新审视死亡供体肝移植中供体与受体大小不匹配的预后影响。","authors":"Toshihiro Nakayama, Miho Akabane, Yuki Imaoka, Carlos O Esquivel, Marc L Melcher, Kazunari Sasaki","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver transplantation (LT) outcomes are influenced by donor-recipient size mismatch. This study re-evaluated the impact on graft size discrepancies on survival outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 53 389 adult LT recipients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2013-2022) were reviewed. The study population was divided by the body surface area index (BSAi), defined as the ratio of donor body surface area (BSA) to recipient BSA, into small-for-size (BSAi < 0.78), normal-for-size (BSAi 0.78-1.24), and large-for-size (BSAi > 1.24) grafts in deceased donor LT (SFSD, NFSD, and LFSD). Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The frequency of size mismatch in deceased donor LT increased over the past 10 y. SFSD had significantly worse 90-d graft survival (<i>P</i> < 0.01), and LFSD had inferior 1-y graft survival among 90-d survivors (<i>P</i> = 0.01). SFSD was hazardous within 90 d post-LT because of vascular complications. Beyond 1 y, graft size did not affect graft survival. LFSD risk within the first year was mitigated with lower model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) 3.0 scores (<35) or shorter cold ischemia time (<8 h).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The negative impacts on donor-recipient size mismatch on survival outcomes are confined to the first year post-LT. SFSD is associated with a slight decrease in 90-d survival rates. LFSD should be utilized more frequently by minimizing cold ischemia time to <8 h, particularly in patients with MELD 3.0 scores below 35. These findings could improve donor-recipient matching and enhance LT outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"10 11","pages":"e1722"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11495742/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting the Prognostic Influences of Donor-Recipient Size Mismatch in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation.\",\"authors\":\"Toshihiro Nakayama, Miho Akabane, Yuki Imaoka, Carlos O Esquivel, Marc L Melcher, Kazunari Sasaki\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001722\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver transplantation (LT) outcomes are influenced by donor-recipient size mismatch. This study re-evaluated the impact on graft size discrepancies on survival outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 53 389 adult LT recipients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2013-2022) were reviewed. The study population was divided by the body surface area index (BSAi), defined as the ratio of donor body surface area (BSA) to recipient BSA, into small-for-size (BSAi < 0.78), normal-for-size (BSAi 0.78-1.24), and large-for-size (BSAi > 1.24) grafts in deceased donor LT (SFSD, NFSD, and LFSD). Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The frequency of size mismatch in deceased donor LT increased over the past 10 y. SFSD had significantly worse 90-d graft survival (<i>P</i> < 0.01), and LFSD had inferior 1-y graft survival among 90-d survivors (<i>P</i> = 0.01). SFSD was hazardous within 90 d post-LT because of vascular complications. Beyond 1 y, graft size did not affect graft survival. LFSD risk within the first year was mitigated with lower model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) 3.0 scores (<35) or shorter cold ischemia time (<8 h).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The negative impacts on donor-recipient size mismatch on survival outcomes are confined to the first year post-LT. SFSD is associated with a slight decrease in 90-d survival rates. LFSD should be utilized more frequently by minimizing cold ischemia time to <8 h, particularly in patients with MELD 3.0 scores below 35. These findings could improve donor-recipient matching and enhance LT outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transplantation Direct\",\"volume\":\"10 11\",\"pages\":\"e1722\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11495742/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transplantation Direct\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001722\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPLANTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001722","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:肝移植(LT)结果受供体与受体大小不匹配的影响。本研究重新评估了移植物大小不一对生存结果的影响:研究回顾了器官共享联合网络数据库(2013-2022 年)中 53 389 名成年肝移植受者的数据。研究人群按体表面积指数(BSAi)(定义为供体体表面积(BSA)与受体体表面积(BSA)之比)分为已故供体LT(SFSD、NFSD和LFSD)中的小尺寸(BSAi为1.24)移植物。进行了多变量 Cox 回归和 Kaplan-Meier 生存分析:SFSD的90天移植物存活率明显较差(P P = 0.01)。SFSD在LT术后90天内因血管并发症而危及生命。1 年后,移植物的大小并不影响移植物的存活率。终末期肝病模型(MELD)3.0 评分越低,第一年内的 LFSD 风险就越低(结论:供体与受体大小不匹配对生存结果的负面影响仅限于 LT 术后第一年。SFSD与90天存活率的轻微下降有关。应更多地使用 LFSD,尽量缩短冷缺血时间,以达到更高的存活率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revisiting the Prognostic Influences of Donor-Recipient Size Mismatch in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation.

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) outcomes are influenced by donor-recipient size mismatch. This study re-evaluated the impact on graft size discrepancies on survival outcomes.

Methods: Data from 53 389 adult LT recipients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2013-2022) were reviewed. The study population was divided by the body surface area index (BSAi), defined as the ratio of donor body surface area (BSA) to recipient BSA, into small-for-size (BSAi < 0.78), normal-for-size (BSAi 0.78-1.24), and large-for-size (BSAi > 1.24) grafts in deceased donor LT (SFSD, NFSD, and LFSD). Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted.

Results: The frequency of size mismatch in deceased donor LT increased over the past 10 y. SFSD had significantly worse 90-d graft survival (P < 0.01), and LFSD had inferior 1-y graft survival among 90-d survivors (P = 0.01). SFSD was hazardous within 90 d post-LT because of vascular complications. Beyond 1 y, graft size did not affect graft survival. LFSD risk within the first year was mitigated with lower model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) 3.0 scores (<35) or shorter cold ischemia time (<8 h).

Conclusions: The negative impacts on donor-recipient size mismatch on survival outcomes are confined to the first year post-LT. SFSD is associated with a slight decrease in 90-d survival rates. LFSD should be utilized more frequently by minimizing cold ischemia time to <8 h, particularly in patients with MELD 3.0 scores below 35. These findings could improve donor-recipient matching and enhance LT outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transplantation Direct
Transplantation Direct TRANSPLANTATION-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
193
审稿时长
8 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