Transplantation proceedings · 2016
Liver Transplantation Results by Donor Age.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rabelo A V, Bastante M D, Raya A M, Méndez C S M, Ramirez A R G, Suarez Y F
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare liver transplantation outcomes as a function of donor age.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed 212 liver transplantations between 2008 and 2014. We described a prospective cohort study and grouped the patients by liver donor age. We compared quantitative and categorical variables using statistical analysis.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found among any graft age groups in gender (always more males), time on waiting list, age, height, Child Pugh Turcotte (CHILD) score, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, need for intraoperative blood products, or intensive care unit stay. The most frequent etiology of liver failure was alcohol. A brain-dead donor was the most frequent type in all groups. The whole graft was used except in 4 cases. No statistically significant differences were found among groups in the surgical technique, postreperfusion syndrome, arterial complications, biliary complications, venous complications, acute rejection, and retransplantation. The 3-year patient survival rate was 64% in the <60-year graft age group, 48% in the 60- to 69-year group, 64% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .264). The 3-year graft survival rate was 62% in the <60-year graft age group, 47% in the 60- to 69-year group, 65% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .295).
CONCLUSIONS: Given the need to increase the pool of liver donors, older donors should be considered as a source for liver transplantation, although careful selection is required.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed 212 liver transplantations between 2008 and 2014. We described a prospective cohort study and grouped the patients by liver donor age. We compared quantitative and categorical variables using statistical analysis.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found among any graft age groups in gender (always more males), time on waiting list, age, height, Child Pugh Turcotte (CHILD) score, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, need for intraoperative blood products, or intensive care unit stay. The most frequent etiology of liver failure was alcohol. A brain-dead donor was the most frequent type in all groups. The whole graft was used except in 4 cases. No statistically significant differences were found among groups in the surgical technique, postreperfusion syndrome, arterial complications, biliary complications, venous complications, acute rejection, and retransplantation. The 3-year patient survival rate was 64% in the <60-year graft age group, 48% in the 60- to 69-year group, 64% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .264). The 3-year graft survival rate was 62% in the <60-year graft age group, 47% in the 60- to 69-year group, 65% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .295).
CONCLUSIONS: Given the need to increase the pool of liver donors, older donors should be considered as a source for liver transplantation, although careful selection is required.