Bertuzzo Valentina Rosa, Cescon Matteo, Odaldi Federica, Di Laudo Marco, Cucchetti Alessandro, Ravaioli Matteo, Del Gaudio Massimo, Ercolani Giorgio, D'Errico Antonietta, Pinna Antonio Daniele
*Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, General and Transplant Surgery Unit, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy †Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Pathology Unit, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Ann Surg. 2017 Feb;265(2):388-396. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001681.
To evaluate the whole experience of liver transplantation (LT) with donors ≥70 years in a single center not applying specific donor/recipient matching criteria.
LT with very old donors has historically been associated with poorer outcomes. With the increasing average donor age and the advent of Model for End-stage Liver Diseases (MELD) score-based allocation criteria, an optimal donor/recipient matching is often unsuitable.
Outcomes of all types of LTs were compared according to 4 study groups: patients transplanted between 1998 and 2003 with donors <70 (group 1, n = 396) or ≥70 years (group 2, n = 88); patients transplanted between 2004 and 2010 with donors <70 (group 3, n = 409), or ≥70 years (group 4, n = 190). From 2003, graft histology was routinely available before cross-clamping, and MELD-driven allocation was adopted.
Groups 1 and 2 were similar for main donor and recipient variables, and surgical details. Group 4 had shorter donor ICU stay, lower rate of moderate-to-severe graft macrosteatosis (2.3% vs 8%), and higher recipient MELD score (22 vs 19) versus group 3. After 2003, median donor age, recipient age, and MELD score significantly increased, whereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased. Five-year graft survival was 63.6% in group 1 versus 59.1% in group 2 (P = 0.252) and 70.9% in group 3 versus 67.6% in group 4 (P = 0.129). Transplants performed between 1998 and 2003, recipient HCV infection, balance of risk score >18, and pre-LT renal replacement treatments were independently associated with worse graft survival.
Even without specific donor/recipient matching criteria, the outcomes of LT with donors ≥70 and <70 years are comparable with appropriate donor management.
在一个未应用特定供体/受体匹配标准的单一中心,评估使用70岁及以上供体进行肝移植(LT)的整体情况。
使用高龄供体进行肝移植在历史上一直与较差的预后相关。随着供体平均年龄的增加以及基于终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分的分配标准的出现,最佳的供体/受体匹配往往并不适用。
根据4个研究组比较了所有类型肝移植的结果:1998年至2003年间接受移植的患者,供体年龄<70岁(第1组,n = 396)或≥70岁(第2组,n = 88);2004年至2010年间接受移植的患者,供体年龄<70岁(第3组,n = 409)或≥70岁(第4组,n = 190)。从2003年起,在夹闭血管前常规获取移植物组织学检查结果,并采用基于MELD评分的分配方式。
第1组和第2组在主要供体和受体变量以及手术细节方面相似。与第3组相比,第4组供体在重症监护病房的停留时间更短,中重度移植物大脂肪变发生率更低(2.3%对8%),受体MELD评分更高(22对19)。2003年后,供体年龄中位数、受体年龄和MELD评分显著增加,而中重度大脂肪变和缺血时间减少。第1组的5年移植物存活率为63.6%,第2组为59.1%(P = 0.252);第3组为70.9%,第4组为67.6%(P = 0.129)。1998年至2003年间进行的移植、受体丙型肝炎病毒感染、风险评分平衡>18以及肝移植前的肾脏替代治疗与较差的移植物存活率独立相关。
即使没有特定的供体/受体匹配标准,使用70岁及以上和70岁以下供体进行肝移植的结果在进行适当的供体管理时是可比的。