4.6 Article

Liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease: Lessons learned and unresolved issues

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 21, 期 39, 页码 10994-11002

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i39.10994

关键词

Liver transplantation; Alcoholic liver disease; Cirrhosis; Alcoholic hepatitis; Survival rates; Relapse; Six-month rule; Sobriety; Solid organ cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of liver transplantation (LT) as a treatment for alcoholic liver disease (ALD) has been highly controversial since the beginning. The ever increasing shortage of organs has accentuated the low priority given to patients suffering from ALD, which is considered a self-inflicted condition. However, by improving the long-term survival rates, making them similar to those from other indications, and recognizing that alcoholism is a primary disease, ALD has become one of the most common indications for LT in Europe and North America, a situation thought unfathomable thirty years ago. Unfortunately, there are still many issues with the use of this procedure for ALD. There are significant relapse rates, and the consequences of excessive drinking after LT range from asymptomatic biochemical and histological abnormalities to graft failure and death. A minimum three-month period of sobriety is required for an improvement in liver function, thus making LT unnecessary, and to demonstrate the patient's commitment to the project, even though a longer abstinence period does not guarantee lower relapse rates after LT. Recent data have shown that LT is also effective for severe alcoholic hepatitis when the patient is unresponsive to corticosteroids therapy, with low relapse rates in highly selected patients, although these results must be confirmed before LT becomes a standard procedure in this setting. Finally, LT for ALD is accompanied by an increased risk of de novo solid organ cancer, skin cancer, and lymphoproliferative disorders, which has a large impact on the survival rates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据