4.6 Review

Early Hepatic Artery Thrombosis after Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Incidence, Outcome and Risk Factors

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 746-757

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02541.x

关键词

Complications; hepatic artery thrombosis; hepatic artery; liver graft survival; liver transplantation; mortality; outcomes; risk factors; risk factor; solid organ transplantation; systematic review; thrombosis; thrombotic complications; thrombus

资金

  1. Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development [ZonMW 945-05-013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To clarify inconsistencies in the literature we performed a systematic review to identify the incidence, risk factors and outcome of early hepatic artery thrombosis (eHAT) after liver transplantation. We searched studies identified from databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index) and references of identified studies. Seventy-one studies out of 999 screened abstracts were eligible for this systematic review. The incidence of eHAT was 4.4% (843/21, 822); in children 8.3% and 2.9% in adults (p < 0.001). Doppler ultrasound screening (DUS) protocols varied from 'no routine' to 'three times a day.' The median time to detection was at day seven. The overall retransplantation rate was 53.1% and was higher in children (61.9%) than in adults (50%, p < 0.03). The overall mortality rate of patients with eHAT was 33.3% (range: 0-80%). Mortality in adults (34.3%) was higher than in children (25%, p < 0.03). The reported risk factors for eHAT were, cytomegalovirus mismatch (seropositive donor liver in seronegative recipient), retransplantation, arterial conduits, prolonged operation time, low recipient weight, variant arterial anatomy, and low volume transplantation centers. eHAT is associated with significant graft loss and mortality. Uniform definitions of eHAT and uniform treatment modalities are obligatory to confirm these results and to obtain a better understanding of this disastrous complication.

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