4.7 Article

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma using grafts from uncontrolled circulatory death donation

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-92976-5

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recurrence of HCC was similar between patients receiving DBD and uDCD livers, but graft survival was lower in the uDCD group. Patient survival was found to be associated with recipient age, pre-OLT bridging therapy, and HCC recurrence, while HCC recurrence was primarily linked to pre-OLT transarterial chemoembolization.
Controversy exists regarding whether the rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) differs when using livers from donation after controlled circulatory death (DCD) versus livers from donation after brain death (DBD). The aim of this cohort study was to analyze rates of HCC recurrence, patient survival, and graft survival after OLT for HCC, comparing recipients of DBD livers (n=103) with recipients of uncontrolled DCD livers (uDCD; n=41). No significant differences in tumor size, tumor number, serum alpha-fetoprotein, proportion of patients within Milan criteria, or pre-OLT bridging therapies were identified between groups, although the waitlist period was significantly shorter in the uDCD group (p=0.040). HCC recurrence was similar between groups. Patient survival was similar between groups, but graft survival was lower in the uDCD group. Multivariate analysis identified recipient age (p=0.031), pre-OLT bridging therapy (p=0.024), and HCC recurrence (p=0.048) as independent risk factors for patient survival and pre-OLT transarterial chemoembolization (p=0.045) as the single risk factor for HCC recurrence. In conclusion, similar patient survival and lower graft survival were observed in the uDCD group. However, the use of uDCD livers appears to be justified due to a shorter waitlist time, and lower waitlist dropout and HCC recurrence 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

4.7
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