4.6 Hardware Review

Body Weight Parameters are Related to Morbidity and Mortality After Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION
卷 103, 期 11, 页码 2287-2303

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002811

关键词

-

资金

  1. International Transplant Nurses Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Weight gain and obesity are well-known clinical issues in liver transplantation (LTx). However, their impacts on patient outcomes remain unclear, as only the impact of pre-LTx body mass index (BMI) on survival has been meta-analyzed. We summarized and synthesized the evidence on pre- and post-LTx body weight parameters' relations with post-LTx outcomes such as survival, metabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities, and healthcare utilization. Methods. We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions' recommendations. Quality was assessed via a 19-item instrument. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for outcomes investigated in >= 5 studies. Results. Our meta-analysis included 37 studies. Patients with pre-LTx BMI >= 30 kg/m(2) and BMI >= 35 kg/m(2) had lower overall survival rates than those with pre-LTx normal weight (72.6% and 69.8% versus 84.2%; P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively). Those with pre-LTx BMI >= 30 kg/m(2) had worse overall graft survival than normal weight patients (75.8% and 85.4%; P = 0.003). Pre-LTx BMI and pre-LTx overweight were associated with new-onset diabetes (P < 0.001 and P = 0.015, respectively), but post-LTx BMI showed no relationship. No associations were evident with healthcare utilization. Conclusions. Patients with BMI values >= 30 kg/m(2) had worse patient and graft survival than those with normal weight. Few of the reviewed studies examined post-LTx body weight parameters or other relevant outcomes such as cardiovascular comorbidities. High heterogeneity as well as diverse definitions and operationalizations of measurement and outcomes severely impeded comparability.

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