4.5 Article

Biliary complications following liver transplantation in the model for end-stage liver disease era: Effect of donor, recipient, and technical factors

期刊

LIVER TRANSPLANTATION
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 73-80

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lt.21354

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biliary complications remain a significant problem following liver transplantation in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) era. We hypothesized that donor, recipient, and technical variables may differentially affect anastomotic biliary complications in MELD era liver transplants. We reviewed 256 deceased donor liver transplants after the institution of MELD at our center and evaluated these variables' association with anastomotic biliary complications. The bile leak rate was 18%, and the stricture rate was 23%. Univariate analysis revealed that recipient age, MELD, donor age, and warm ischemia were risk factors for leak, whereas a Roux limb or stent was protective. A bile leak was a risk factor for anastornotic stricture, whereas use of histidine tryptophan ketoglutarate (HTK) versus University of Wisconsin (UW) solution was protective. Additionally, use of a transcystic tube/stent was also protective. Multivariate analysis showed that warm ischemia was the only independent risk factor for a leak, whereas development of a leak was the only independent risk factor for a stricture. HTK versus UW use and transcystic tube/stent use were the only independent protective factors against stricture. Use of an internal stent trended in the multivariate analysis toward being protective against leaks and strictures, but this was not quite statistically significant. This represents one of the first MELD era studies of deceased donor liver transplants evaluating factors affecting the incidence of anastornotic bile leaks and strictures. Donor, recipient, and technical factors appear to differentially affect the incidence of anastornotic biliary complications, with warm ischemia, use of HTK, and use of a stent emerging as the most important variables.

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

4.5
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