3.9 Article Proceedings Paper

Long-term analysis of combined liver and kidney transplantation at a single center

期刊

ARCHIVES OF SURGERY
卷 141, 期 8, 页码 735-741

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.141.8.735

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To analyze use of combined liver and kidney transplantation (CLKT) for patients with chronic primary diseases of both organs and for patients with hepatorenal syndrome. Design: Retrospective case series. Setting: Multiorgan transplantation service in a large university medical center. Patients: A total of 98 patients underwent 99 CLKTs during a 16-year period; 76 had primary renal diseases, and 22 had hepatorenal syndrome. Patients receiving isolated liver and kidney transplants were analyzed for comparison. Main Outcome Measures: Patient and graft survival, rejection rates, and need for hemodialysis before and after transplantation. Results: Overall patient survival was 76%, 72%, and 70% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively; liver graft survival was 70%, 65%, and 65%; and kidney graft survival was 76%, 72%, and 70%. No risk factors analyzed for recipients or donors were associated significantly with early posttransplantation mortality or graft loss. In 28 patients who received monoclonal antibody induction therapy with interleukin 2 blockers, there were significantly fewer episodes of acute liver rejection. For patients with hepatorenal syndrome, CLKT did not confer a survival advantage over liver-only transplantation (1-year patient survival was 72% vs 66%; P=.88). The 1-year acute kidney rejection rate in the adult CLKT group was 14% vs 23% in a 5-year cadaveric renal transplantation cohort (P <.01). Conclusions: First, CLKT is indicated in patients with dual organ disease and achieves excellent results. Second, CLKT for hepatorenal syndrome is indicated in Patients receiving hemodialysis for longer than 8 weeks and confers advantages in patient survival and use of hospital resources. Third, the liver is immunoprotective for the kidney.

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

3.9
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