The short- and long-term outcomes in living-donor liver transplantation using small-for-size graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:3
|
作者
Kim, Ki-Hun [1 ,2 ]
Kim, Sang-Hoon [1 ]
Cho, Hwui-Dong [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ulsan, Asan Med Ctr, Coll Med, Dept Surg,Div Liver Transplantat & Hepatobiliary S, Seoul, South Korea
[2] 88 Olymp Ro 43 Gil, Seoul 05505, South Korea
关键词
Graft -to -recipient weight ratio; Living -donor liver transplantation; Small -for -size graft; Small -for -size syndromes; meta; -analysis; RECIPIENT WEIGHT RATIO; PORTAL FLOW; MODULATION; INFLOW; IMPACT; VOLUME; PROGNOSIS; RISKS; VEIN;
D O I
10.1016/j.trre.2023.100747
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background: A standard graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) >= 0.8% is widely accepted in living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT); however, the potential donor pool is expanded to patients adopting small-for-size graft (SFSGs) with GRWR <0.8%. This study aimed to investigate the effect of SFSG on short-and long-term outcomes following LDLT. Methods: Electronic databases were searched from January 1995 to January 2022 for studies comparing short-or long-term outcomes between patients with SFSG (GRWR <0.8%, SFSG group) and sufficient volume graft (GRWR >= 0.8%, non-SFSG group). The primary outcomes were one-, three-, and five-year overall survival (OS) and graft survival (GS), while the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. Results: Twenty-four studies comprising 7996 patients were included. In terms of OS, SFSG group had poor three-year OS (HR: 1.48, 95% CI [1.01, 2.15], p = 0.04), but there were no significant differences between two groups in one-year OS (HR: 1.50, 95% CI [0.98, 2.29], p = 0.06) and five-year OS (HR: 1.40, 95% CI [0.95, 2.08], p = 0.02). In GS, there were no significant differences in one-year (HR 1.31, 95% CI [1.00, 1.72], p = 0.05), three-year (HR 1.33, 95% CI [0.97, 1.82], p = 0.07), and five-year GS (HR 1.17, 95% CI [0.95, 1.44], p = 0.13). The SFSG group had comparable postoperative complications, except for a high incidence of vascular complications and small-for-size syndromes. Conclusions: Expanding the potential donor pool in LDLT to SFSG with GRWR <0.8% can be acceptable in terms of comparable long-term OS and GS, despite the risk for vascular complications and small-for-size syndrome.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Small-for-Size versus Standard-Size Graft in Living Donor Liver Transplantation
    Dogar, Abdul Wahab
    Uddin, Shams
    Hussain, Azhar
    Ullah, Kaleem
    Ghaffar, Abdul
    Abbas, Syed Hasnain
    JCPSP-JOURNAL OF THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS PAKISTAN, 2022, 32 (03): : 293 - 297
  • [32] The Right Small-for-Size Graft Results in Better Outcomes than the Left Small-for-Size Graft in Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation
    Nam-Joon Yi
    Kyung-Suk Suh
    Yong Beom Cho
    Hae Won Lee
    Eung-Ho Cho
    Jai Young Cho
    Woo Young Shin
    Joohyun Kim
    Kuhn Uk Lee
    World Journal of Surgery, 2008, 32 : 1722 - 1730
  • [33] Transient portacaval shunt for a small-for-size graft in living donor liver transplantation
    Taniguchi, Masahiko
    Shimamura, Tsuyoshi
    Suzuki, Tomomi
    Yamashita, Kenichiro
    Oura, Tetsu
    Watanabe, Masaaki
    Kamiyama, Toshiya
    Matsushita, Michiaki
    Furukawa, Hiroyuki
    Todo, Satoru
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2007, 13 (06) : 932 - 934
  • [34] The right small-for-size graft results in better outcomes than the left small-for-size graft in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation
    Yi, Nam-Joon
    Suh, Kyung-Suk
    Cho, Yong Beom
    Lee, Hae Won
    Cho, Eung-Ho
    Cho, Jai Young
    Shin, Woo Young
    Kim, Joohyun
    Lee, Kuhn Uk
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2008, 32 (08) : 1722 - 1730
  • [35] Long-Term Outcomes After Splenectomy for Small-for-Size Syndrome in Live Donor Liver Transplantation.
    Dib, M.
    Goldaracena, N.
    Barbas, A.
    Marquez, M.
    Sapisochin, G.
    Beriault, C.
    Selzner, N.
    McGilvray, I.
    Renner, E.
    Greig, P.
    Lilly, L.
    Ghanekar, A.
    Cattral, M.
    Selzner, M.
    Grant, D.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2016, 16 : 472 - 473
  • [36] Early Graft Dysfunction in Living Donor Liver Transplantation and the Small-for-size Syndrome
    Graham J.A.
    Samstein B.
    Emond J.C.
    Current Transplantation Reports, 2014, 1 (1) : 43 - 52
  • [37] Graft Regeneration Rate and Small-for-Size Syndrome in Living Donor Liver Transplantation
    Mori, Shozo
    Kim, Hyeyoung
    Park, Min-Su
    Choi, Youngrok
    Hong, Geun
    Yi, Nam-Joon
    Lee, Kwang-Woong
    Suh, Kyung-Suk
    HEPATO-GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2013, 60 (126) : 1463 - 1468
  • [38] Transient portocaval shunt for a small-for-size graft in living donor liver transplantation
    Ikegami, Toru
    Imura, Satoru
    Arakawa, Yusuke
    Shimada, Mitsuo
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2008, 14 (02) : 262 - 262
  • [39] IMPACT OF LEFT LOBE GRAFT ON ADULT LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION: SMALL-FOR-SIZE GRAFT IS NOT A RISK FACTOR FOR SHORT AND LONG OUTCOME
    Imura, Satoru
    Shimada, Mitsuo
    Utsunomiya, Tohru
    Morine, Yuji
    Ikemoto, Tetsuya
    Mori, Hiroki
    Hanaoka, Jun
    Kanamoto, Mami
    Iwahashi, Shuichi
    Saito, Yu
    Asanoma, Michihito
    Yamada, Shinichiro
    TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 24 : 311 - 311
  • [40] Correction to: Short- and long-term outcomes in infective endocarditis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Tadesse Melaku Abegaz
    Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula
    Eyob Alemayehu Gebreyohannes
    Alemayehu B. Mekonnen
    Tamrat Befekadu Abebe
    BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 18