4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Early Outcomes of Liver Transplantation Using Donors After Circulatory Death in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Comparative Study

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 359-364

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.10.021

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) has increased in the last decade, although a slight increase in surgical complications has been reported in liver transplantation (LT). Therefore, DCD is not overall recommended because it entails an added risk. However, DCD in selected patients shows acceptable results. Objective. The objective was to analyze the characteristics, early outcomes, and survival at 1 year post-LT from a single institute (January 2015 to May 2017). Materials and methods. We included 18 DCD-LTs and compared them with a control group of 18 donation after brain death (DBD) LTs. We analyzed pre- and posttransplant variables related to donors, recipients, and intraoperative early outcomes within patients transplanted due to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A descriptive analysis, Mann-Whitney U test, chi(2), or Fisher test was performed when appropriate, as well as multivariate analysis in case of statistical significance. A variable is considered as statistically significant when it reaches a value of P < .05. Results. In DBD, we found a lower length of stay in the intensive care unit before retrieval and a higher rate of alcoholism and diabetes mellitus, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and Child B and C score (P < .05). Most of the DCD were originally from the same LT recipient center, and a higher donor mean post-LT alanine aminotransferase level was found (P < .05). Survival for the DBD group was 88% and 75% in the DCD group at 1 year post-LT, being not significant (NS). Conclusion. HCC recipients who are transplanted with good quality DCD livers do no worse than those transplanted with livers from DBD donors, although a good selection of them is crucial.

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

4.1
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