4.3 Article

Detrimental impact of early biopsy-proven rejection in liver transplantation

期刊

CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ctr.15206

关键词

immunosuppression; infection; outcomes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is conflicting evidence on whether early acute cellular rejection affects long-term outcomes in liver transplantation. A retrospective study found that early biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (EBPR) is associated with decreased graft survival, increased risk of late rejection, and susceptibility to infection.
Existing literature offers conflicting conclusions about whether early acute cellular rejection influences long-term outcomes in liver transplantation. We retrospectively collected donor and recipient data on all adult, first-time liver transplants performed at a single center between 2008 and 2020. We divided this population into two cohorts based on the presence of early biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (EBPR) within the first 90 days post-transplant and compared outcomes between the groups. There were 896 liver transplants that met inclusion criteria with 112 cases (12.5%) of EBPR. Recipients who developed EBPR had higher biochemical Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (28 vs. 24, p < .01), but other donor and recipient characteristics were similar. Recipients with EBPR had similar overall survival compared to patients without EBPR (p = .09) but had decreased graft survival (p < .05). EBPR was also associated with decreased time to first episode of late (> 90 days post-transplant) rejection (p < .0001) and increased vulnerability to bacterial and viral infection (p < .05). In subgroup analysis of recipients with autoimmune indications for liver transplantation, EBPR had a more pronounced association with patient death (hazard ratio [HR] 3.9, p < .05) and graft loss (HR 4.0, p < .01). EBPR after liver transplant is associated with inferior graft survival, increased susceptibility to late rejections, and increased vulnerability to infection.

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

4.3
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