4.5 Article

Risk of colonic neoplasia after liver transplantation for primary sclerosing cholangitis

Journal

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages 269-274

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ibd.21692

Keywords

primary sclerosing cholangitis; colonic neoplasia; liver transplantation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) confers an increased risk of colon cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, there is a scarcity of data to determine whether the rate of colon cancer changes after liver transplantation (LT) in IBD patients with PSC. The aims were 1) to estimate the risk of colon neoplasia after LT in IBD patients with PSC; 2) to identify the factors associated with colon neoplasia after LT in IBD patients with PSC. Methods: We identified patients with IBD/PSC who underwent LT from 1998-2005 (n = 43). Two control groups were identified. Control 1 was IBD/PSC who did not undergo LT, matched 1:1 for age, gender, and type of IBD. Control 2 was patients with chronic liver disease other than PSC who underwent LT, matched 1:1 for age, gender, and follow-up time since LT. All patients were monitored by serial colonoscopy. Logistic regression analysis was used. Results: During a mean follow-up of 54.7 +/- 47.7 months, patients with IBD/PSC who underwent LT had similar rate of colon neoplasia compared to those who did not have LT (34% versus 30%, P = 0.24). The rate of colon neoplasia in LT recipients was higher in PSC patients compared to those with other forms of chronic liver disease (34% versus 0%, P = 0.018). Post-LT cytomegalovirus infection was associated with higher likelihood of colon neoplasia post-LT in IBD/PSC patients (hazard ratio -4.4, P = 0.024). There was no significant difference in survival outcome between the three study groups. Conclusions: IBD/PSC patients remain at an increased risk of colon neoplasia after LT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available