Departments of Transplant and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.
Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.
Liver Transpl. 2021 Jul;27(7):971-983. doi: 10.1002/lt.25993. Epub 2021 Jun 24.
Although recent studies have reported favorable outcomes in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), it remains unclear which populations benefit most from LDLT. This study aims to evaluate LDLT outcomes compared with deceased donor LT (DDLT) according to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score categories. Using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, outcomes were compared between 1486 LDLTs; 13,568 donation after brain death (DBD)-DDLTs; and 1171 donation after circulatory death (DCD)-DDLTs between 2009 and 2018. Because LDLT for patients with MELD scores >30 was rare, all patients with scores >30 were excluded to equalize LDLT and DDLT cohorts. Risk factors for 1-year graft loss (GL) were determined separately for LDLT and DDLT. Compared with LDLT, DBD-DDLT had a lower risk of 30-day (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.60; P < 0.001) and 1-year GL (aHR, 0.57; P < 0.001). The lower risk of GL was more prominent in the mid-MELD score category (score 15-29). Compared with LDLT, DCD-DDLT had a lower risk of 30-day GL but a comparable risk of 1-year GL, regardless of MELD score category. In LDLT, significant ascites was an independent risk for GL in patients with mid-MELD scores (aHR, 1.68; P = 0.02), but not in the lower-MELD score group. The risk of 1-year GL in LDLT patients with ascites who received a left liver was higher than either those who received a right liver or those without ascites who received a left liver. In LDLT, combinations of MELD scores of 15 to 29, moderate/severe ascites, and the use of a left liver are associated with worse outcomes. These findings help calibrate appropriate patient and graft selection in LDLT.
尽管最近的研究报告了活体供肝移植(LDLT)的良好结果,但仍不清楚哪些人群从 LDLT 中获益最大。本研究旨在根据终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分类别评估 LDLT 与死后供肝移植(DDLT)的结果。使用 2009 年至 2018 年美国器官共享网络登记处的数据,比较了 1486 例 LDLT;13568 例脑死亡后供体(DBD)-DDLT;和 1171 例循环死亡后供体(DCD)-DDLT。由于 MELD 评分>30 的患者接受 LDLT 较为罕见,因此排除了所有评分>30 的患者,以使 LDLT 和 DDLT 队列均衡。分别确定 LDLT 和 DDLT 患者 1 年移植物丢失(GL)的危险因素。与 LDLT 相比,DBD-DDLT 的 30 天(校正后的危险比[aHR],0.60;P<0.001)和 1 年 GL(aHR,0.57;P<0.001)风险较低。中 MELD 评分类别(评分 15-29)的 GL 风险降低更为显著。与 LDLT 相比,无论 MELD 评分类别如何,DCD-DDLT 的 30 天 GL 风险较低,但 1 年 GL 风险相当。在 LDLT 中,中 MELD 评分患者中明显腹水是 GL 的独立危险因素(aHR,1.68;P=0.02),而在低 MELD 评分组中则不是。患有腹水的中 MELD 评分患者接受左肝时 1 年 GL 风险高于接受右肝或无腹水但接受左肝的患者。在 LDLT 中,MELD 评分 15 至 29 分、中度/重度腹水和使用左肝与较差的结果相关。这些发现有助于在 LDLT 中校准适当的患者和移植物选择。