4.5 Article

Pediatric Liver Transplantation Outcomes in Korea

Journal

JOURNAL OF KOREAN MEDICAL SCIENCE
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages 42-47

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD MEDICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.1.42

Keywords

Liver Transplantation; Children; Survival; Rejection; Retransplantation

Funding

  1. The Korean Society of Transplantation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pediatric liver transplantation is the standard of care for treatment of liver failure in children. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics of pediatric liver transplantation in centers located in Korea and determine factors that influence outcomes. This retrospective study was performed using data from between 1988 and 2010 and included all recipients 18 yr old and younger who underwent pediatric liver transplantation in Korea during that period. Our data sources were hospital medical records and the outcome measure was overall patient survival. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were undertaken using the Cox proportional hazards model. Five hundred and thirty-four pediatric liver transplantations were performed in 502 children. Median age and average pediatric end-stage liver disease (PELD) score were 20 months and 18 point, respectively. Biliary atresia (57.7%, 308/534) was the most common cause of liver disease. Eighty-two (15.3%) were deceased donor liver transplantations and 454 (84.7%) were living donor liver transplantations. Retransplantation was performed in 32 cases (6%). Overall, 1-, 5-, and 10-yr patient survival rates were 87.8%, 82.2%, and 78.1%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, independent significant predictors of poor patient survival were chronic rejection and retransplantation. This study presents the epidemiologic data for nearly all pediatric liver transplantation in Korea and shows that the independent prognostic factors in patient survival are chronic rejection and retransplantation.

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