Suppr超能文献

扩大供体池:循环死亡后捐献和活体肝移植不会影响肝移植的结果。

Expanding the donor pool: Donation after circulatory death and living liver donation do not compromise the results of liver transplantation.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Toronto General Hospital, Onatrio, Canada.

Toronto Centre for Liver Disease, Toronto General Hospital, Onatrio, Canada.

出版信息

Liver Transpl. 2018 Jun;24(6):779-789. doi: 10.1002/lt.25068. Epub 2018 May 14.

Abstract

Because of the shortfall between the number of patients listed for liver transplantation (LT) and the available grafts, strategies to expand the donor pool have been developed. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) and living donor (LD) grafts are not universally used because of the concerns of graft failure, biliary complications, and donor risks. In order to overcome the barriers for the implementation of using all 3 types of grafts, we compared outcomes after LT of DCD, LD, and donation after brain death (DBD) grafts. Patients who received a LD, DCD, or DBD liver graft at the University of Toronto were included. Between January 2009 through April 2017, 1054 patients received a LT at our center. Of these, 77 patients received a DCD graft (DCD group); 271 received a LD graft (LD group); and 706 received a DBD graft (DBD group). Overall biliary complications were higher in the LD group (11.8%) compared with the DCD group (5.2%) and the DBD group (4.8%; P < 0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates were similar between the groups with 88.3%, 83.2%, and 69.2% in the DCD group versus 92.6%, 85.4%, and 84.7% in the LD group versus 90.2%, 84.2%, and 79.9% in the DBD group (P = 0.24). Furthermore, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival was comparable, with 92.2%, 85.4%, and 71.6% in the DCD group versus 95.2%, 88.8%, and 88.8% in the LD group versus 93.1%, 87.5%, and 83% in the DBD group (P = 0.14). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that the type of graft did not impact graft survival. In conclusion, DCD, LD, and DBD grafts have similar longterm graft survival rates. Increasing the use of LD and DCD grafts may improve access to LT without affecting graft survival rates. Liver Transplantation 24 779-789 2018 AASLD.

摘要

由于肝移植(LT)患者人数与可用供体之间存在差距,因此已经开发了扩大供体库的策略。由于对移植物失功、胆道并发症和供体风险的担忧,死后循环死亡(DCD)和活体供体(LD)移植物并未广泛使用。为了克服使用所有 3 种移植物的实施障碍,我们比较了 DCD、LD 和脑死亡后捐献(DBD)移植物 LT 的结果。纳入在多伦多大学接受 LD、DCD 或 DBD 肝移植的患者。2009 年 1 月至 2017 年 4 月,我院共收治 1054 例 LT 患者。其中,77 例患者接受 DCD 移植物(DCD 组);271 例患者接受 LD 移植物(LD 组);706 例患者接受 DBD 移植物(DBD 组)。LD 组的总体胆道并发症发生率(11.8%)高于 DCD 组(5.2%)和 DBD 组(4.8%)(P<0.001)。DCD 组的 1、3 和 5 年移植物存活率分别为 88.3%、83.2%和 69.2%,LD 组分别为 92.6%、85.4%和 84.7%,DBD 组分别为 90.2%、84.2%和 79.9%(P=0.24)。此外,1、3 和 5 年患者存活率相当,DCD 组分别为 92.2%、85.4%和 71.6%,LD 组分别为 95.2%、88.8%和 88.8%,DBD 组分别为 93.1%、87.5%和 83%(P=0.14)。多变量 Cox 回归分析显示,移植物类型不影响移植物存活率。总之,DCD、LD 和 DBD 移植物具有相似的长期移植物存活率。增加 LD 和 DCD 移植物的使用可能会改善 LT 的可及性,而不会影响移植物存活率。肝移植 24 779-789 2018 AASLD。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ea4/6099346/baf2bb87e0a0/LT-24-779-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验