活体和已故供肝移植受者围手术期事件:病例对照研究

B. Gali, D. Plevak, D. Nagorney, C. Rosen, J. Heimbach, R. Dierkhising, J. Findlay
{"title":"活体和已故供肝移植受者围手术期事件:病例对照研究","authors":"B. Gali, D. Plevak, D. Nagorney, C. Rosen, J. Heimbach, R. Dierkhising, J. Findlay","doi":"10.2174/1874418401105010008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Living donor liver transplantation (LD) has been implemented as an alternative to deceased donor transplantation (DD). We reviewed the perioperative course of recipients of LD and recipients of DD at our institution with specific aims to compare intraoperative events, early complication rates, resource utilization, and patient survival. Methods: Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the first forty LD cases were retrospectively matched by age, sex, and primary reason for transplant with controls that underwent DD between June 30, 2000 and January 25, 2005. Preoperative data, intraoperative variables, and immediate postoperative data were collected. Statistical analysis included signed rank test, McNemar's test, Wald statistics, and stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Calculated Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were higher for DD (median 18 vs. 14 with p=0.04). Anesthesia time was longer in LD (median 7.1 vs. 6.5, p=0.02). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was higher in LD (median 12 vs. 8 days, P=0.002). Seven of the 40 (17%) LD were deceased at the time of data collection, as were four (10%) of the DD. Conclusions: Comparison of DD and LD at our institution revealed few significant differences in perioperative variables. LD may have more postoperative complications and longer hospital stays but similar patient survival.","PeriodicalId":90368,"journal":{"name":"The open transplantation journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"08-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative Events in Living and Deceased Donor Liver Transplant Recipients: A Case Control Study\",\"authors\":\"B. Gali, D. Plevak, D. Nagorney, C. Rosen, J. Heimbach, R. Dierkhising, J. Findlay\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874418401105010008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Living donor liver transplantation (LD) has been implemented as an alternative to deceased donor transplantation (DD). We reviewed the perioperative course of recipients of LD and recipients of DD at our institution with specific aims to compare intraoperative events, early complication rates, resource utilization, and patient survival. Methods: Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the first forty LD cases were retrospectively matched by age, sex, and primary reason for transplant with controls that underwent DD between June 30, 2000 and January 25, 2005. Preoperative data, intraoperative variables, and immediate postoperative data were collected. Statistical analysis included signed rank test, McNemar's test, Wald statistics, and stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Calculated Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were higher for DD (median 18 vs. 14 with p=0.04). Anesthesia time was longer in LD (median 7.1 vs. 6.5, p=0.02). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was higher in LD (median 12 vs. 8 days, P=0.002). Seven of the 40 (17%) LD were deceased at the time of data collection, as were four (10%) of the DD. Conclusions: Comparison of DD and LD at our institution revealed few significant differences in perioperative variables. LD may have more postoperative complications and longer hospital stays but similar patient survival.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The open transplantation journal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"08-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The open transplantation journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874418401105010008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open transplantation journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874418401105010008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

活体供体肝移植(LD)作为一种替代已故供体肝移植(DD)的方法已被实施。我们回顾了我院LD和DD患者的围手术期病程,目的是比较术中事件、早期并发症发生率、资源利用和患者生存率。方法:经机构审查委员会(IRB)批准,将前40例LD患者按年龄、性别和移植主要原因与2000年6月30日至2005年1月25日期间接受DD的对照组进行回顾性匹配。收集术前数据、术中变量和术后即时数据。统计分析包括秩号检验、McNemar检验、Wald统计和分层Cox比例风险模型。结果:DD的终末期肝病计算模型(MELD)评分较高(中位数18比14,p=0.04)。LD患者麻醉时间较长(中位7.1比6.5,p=0.02)。LD患者的住院时间(LOS)较高(中位12天vs. 8天,P=0.002)。在收集数据时,40例LD中有7例(17%)死亡,4例DD(10%)死亡。结论:我院DD和LD的比较显示围手术期变量没有显著差异。LD可能有更多的术后并发症和更长的住院时间,但患者生存率相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perioperative Events in Living and Deceased Donor Liver Transplant Recipients: A Case Control Study
Living donor liver transplantation (LD) has been implemented as an alternative to deceased donor transplantation (DD). We reviewed the perioperative course of recipients of LD and recipients of DD at our institution with specific aims to compare intraoperative events, early complication rates, resource utilization, and patient survival. Methods: Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the first forty LD cases were retrospectively matched by age, sex, and primary reason for transplant with controls that underwent DD between June 30, 2000 and January 25, 2005. Preoperative data, intraoperative variables, and immediate postoperative data were collected. Statistical analysis included signed rank test, McNemar's test, Wald statistics, and stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Calculated Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were higher for DD (median 18 vs. 14 with p=0.04). Anesthesia time was longer in LD (median 7.1 vs. 6.5, p=0.02). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was higher in LD (median 12 vs. 8 days, P=0.002). Seven of the 40 (17%) LD were deceased at the time of data collection, as were four (10%) of the DD. Conclusions: Comparison of DD and LD at our institution revealed few significant differences in perioperative variables. LD may have more postoperative complications and longer hospital stays but similar patient survival.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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