Clinical outcomes after transplantation of domino grafts or standard deceased donor livers: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Parente Alessandro1ORCID,Milana Flavio1,Hajibandeh Shahin2,Hajibandeh Shahab3ORCID,Tirotta Fabio4,Cho Hwui‐Dong1,Kasahara Mureo5,Kim Ki‐Hun1,Schlegel Andrea6

Affiliation:

1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center University of Ulsan College of Medicine Seoul South Korea

2. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery University Hospital Coventry Coventry UK

3. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery University Hospital of Wales Cardiff UK

4. Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust Birmingham UK

5. Organ Transplantation Center National Center for Child Health and Development Tokyo Japan

6. Transplantation Center, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Department of Immunology Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland Ohio USA

Abstract

AbstractBackground and AimDomino 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.MethodsMEDLINE, 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.ResultsFive 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.ConclusionThis 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.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3