Ivanics Tommy, Limkemann Ashley, Patel Madhukar S, Claasen Marco P A W, Rajendran Luckshi, Choi Woo JIn, Shwaartz Chaya, Selzner Nazia, Lilly Les, Bhat Mamatha, Tsien Cynthia, Selzner Markus, McGilvray Ian, Sayed Blayne, Reichman Trevor, Cattral Mark, Ghanekar Anand, Sapisochin Gonzalo
Multi Organ Transplant Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; Department of Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI; Department of Surgical Sciences, Akademiska sjukhuset, Uppsala University, Sweden.
Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.
Surgery. 2023 Feb;173(2):529-536. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.09.022. Epub 2022 Nov 2.
Despite most liver transplants in North America being from deceased donors, the number of living donor liver transplants has increased over the last decade. Although outcomes of liver retransplantation after deceased donor liver transplantation have been widely published, outcomes of retransplant after living donor liver transplant need to be further elucidated.
We aimed to compare waitlist outcomes and survival post-retransplant in recipients of initial living or deceased donor grafts. Adult liver recipients relisted at University Health Network between April 2000 and October 2020 were retrospectively identified and grouped according to their initial graft: living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplant. A competing risk multivariable model evaluated the association between graft type at first transplant and outcomes after relisting. Survival after retransplant waitlisting (intention-to-treat) and after retransplant (per protocol) were also assessed. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the effect of initial graft type on survival after retransplant.
A total of 201 recipients were relisted (living donor liver transplants, n = 67; donor liver transplants, n = 134) and 114 underwent retransplant (living donor liver transplants, n = 48; deceased donor liver transplants, n = 66). The waitlist mortality with an initial living donor liver transplant was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-1.10; P = .08). Both unadjusted and adjusted graft loss risks were similar post-retransplant. The risk-adjusted overall intention-to-treat survival after relisting (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.32; P = .30) and per protocol survival after retransplant (hazard ratio:1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-4.19; P = .40) were equivalent in those who initially received a living donor liver transplant.
Patients requiring relisting and retransplant after either living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplantation experience similar waitlist and survival outcomes.
尽管北美大多数肝脏移植来自已故供体,但在过去十年中,活体供肝移植的数量有所增加。虽然已故供体肝移植后再次移植的结果已被广泛报道,但活体供肝移植后再次移植的结果仍需进一步阐明。
我们旨在比较初次接受活体或已故供体移植物的受者在等待名单上的结果和再次移植后的生存率。回顾性确定2000年4月至2020年10月期间在大学健康网络重新列入名单的成年肝脏受者,并根据其初次移植物进行分组:活体供肝移植或已故供体肝移植。一个竞争风险多变量模型评估了首次移植时的移植物类型与重新列入名单后的结果之间的关联。还评估了再次移植等待名单(意向性治疗)和再次移植后(按方案)的生存率。多变量Cox回归评估了初次移植物类型对再次移植后生存率的影响。
共有201名受者重新列入名单(活体供肝移植,n = 67;已故供体肝移植,n = 134),114名接受了再次移植(活体供肝移植,n = 48;已故供体肝移植,n = 66)。初次接受活体供肝移植的等待名单死亡率无显著差异(风险比 = 0.51;95%置信区间,0.23 - 1.10;P = 0.08)。再次移植后未调整和调整后的移植物丢失风险相似。初次接受活体供肝移植的患者再次列入名单后的风险调整后总体意向性治疗生存率(风险比 = 0.76;95%置信区间,0.44 - 1.32;P = 0.30)和再次移植后的按方案生存率(风险比:1.51;95%置信区间,0.54 - 4.19;P = 0.40)相当。
活体供肝移植或已故供体肝移植后需要重新列入名单和再次移植的患者在等待名单和生存结果方面相似。