Division of Hepatobiliary and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Coventry, Coventry, UK.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024 Apr;39(4):620-629. doi: 10.1111/jgh.16476. Epub 2024 Jan 16.
Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes otherwise discarded livers as donor grafts for another recipients. It is unclear whether DLT has less favorable outcomes compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). We aimed to assess the outcomes of DLT compared to DDLT.
MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science database were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes after DLT with DDLT. Data were pooled using random-effects modeling, evaluating odds ratios (OR) or mean difference (MD) for outcomes including waiting list time, severe hemorrhage, intensive care unit (ICU), length hospital stay (LOS), rejection, renal, vascular, and biliary events, and recipient survival at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years.
Five studies were identified including 945 patients (DLT = 409, DDLT = 536). The DLT recipients were older compared to the DDLT group (P = 0.04), and both cohorts were comparable regarding lab MELD, hepatocellular carcinoma, and waitlist time. There were no differences in vascular (OR: 1.60, P = 0.39), renal (OR: 0.62, P = 0.24), biliary (OR: 1.51, P = 0.21), severe hemorrhage (OR: 1.09, P = 0.86), rejection (OR: 0.78, P = 0.51), ICU stay (MD: 0.50, P = 0.21), or LOS (MD: 1.68, P = 0.46) between DLT and DDLT. DLT and DDLT were associated with comparable 1-year (78.9% vs 80.4%; OR: 1.03, P = 0.89), 3-year (56.2% vs 54.1%; OR: 1.35, P = 0.07), and 10-year survival (6.5% vs 8.5%; OR: 0.8, P = 0.67) rates. DLT was associated with higher 5-year survival (41.6% vs 36.4%; OR: 1.70; P = 0.003) compared to DDLT, which was not confirmed at sensitivity analysis.
This meta-analysis of the best available evidence (Level 2a) demonstrated that DLT and DDLT have comparable outcomes. As indications for liver transplantation expand, future high-quality research is encouraged to increase the DLT numbers in clinical practice, serving the growing waiting list candidates, with the caveat of uncertain de novo disease transmission risks.
多米诺肝移植(DLT)利用原本要废弃的肝脏作为供体移植物,用于另一受体。目前尚不清楚 DLT 的结果是否比已故供体肝移植(DDLT)更差。我们旨在评估 DLT 与 DDLT 的结果。
通过 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库检索比较 DLT 与 DDLT 后结果的研究。使用随机效应模型汇总数据,评估等待名单时间、严重出血、重症监护病房(ICU)、住院时间(LOS)、排斥、肾、血管和胆道事件以及 1、3、5 和 10 年的受体存活率等结果的比值比(OR)或均数差(MD)。
确定了 5 项研究,共纳入 945 名患者(DLT=409,DDLT=536)。与 DDLT 组相比,DLT 组的患者年龄更大(P=0.04),两组在实验室 MELD、肝细胞癌和等待名单时间方面均具有可比性。血管(OR:1.60,P=0.39)、肾(OR:0.62,P=0.24)、胆道(OR:1.51,P=0.21)、严重出血(OR:1.09,P=0.86)、排斥(OR:0.78,P=0.51)、ICU 入住时间(MD:0.50,P=0.21)或 LOS(MD:1.68,P=0.46)在 DLT 和 DDLT 之间无差异。DLT 和 DDLT 与 1 年(78.9% vs 80.4%;OR:1.03,P=0.89)、3 年(56.2% vs 54.1%;OR:1.35,P=0.07)和 10 年生存率(6.5% vs 8.5%;OR:0.8,P=0.67)相当。与 DDLT 相比,DLT 与更高的 5 年生存率(41.6% vs 36.4%;OR:1.70;P=0.003)相关,但该结果在敏感性分析中未得到证实。
这项对最佳现有证据(2a 级)的荟萃分析表明,DLT 和 DDLT 的结果相当。随着肝移植适应证的扩大,鼓励未来进行高质量的研究,以增加临床实践中的 DLT 数量,服务于不断增长的等待名单患者,同时需注意不确定的新发疾病传播风险。