ReviewViszeralmedizin2015
Liver Transplantation for Patients with Cholestatic Liver Diseases.
Review in Viszeralmedizin, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review: efficacy of therapies for cholestatic pruritus.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Pathogenic Novel Heterozygous Variant c.1076c>T p. (Ser359Phe) chr1: 120512166 in NOTCH2 Gene, Type 2 Alagille Syndrome Causing Neonatal Cholestasis: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2022Article
- Cellular senescence in the cholangiopathies: a driver of immunopathology and a novel therapeutic target.Seminars in immunopathology · 2022Review
- Outcomes of Liver Transplant Candidates with Primary Biliary Cholangitis: The Data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
- Article
- Acute and Chronic Inflammation of the Biliary System.Viszeralmedizin · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCholestatic liver diseases (CD) account for 11% of all liver transplantations (LT) in the Eurotransplant region. Despite the excellent long-term outcome that is considerably superior to all other indications for LT, transplant surgeons and physicians face nowadays - in the era of MELD (Model of End-Stage Liver Disease)-based allocation, organ shortage, and extended allocation policies - more and more challenges in this patient cohort, especially since there is no curative medical treatment for these entities.
methodsBased on a literature review and personal experience in liver transplantation for CD, we show the status quo of indication, allocation, and outcome as well as potential strategies to overcome long waiting times and organ shortage.
resultsConcerning graft and patient survival, CD remain the 'best indications' for LT. Since the implementation of MELD-based allocation results in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) could be preserved on good levels only by the implementation and revision of standard exceptions. Recurrence of PSC after LT remains a challenge for transplant surgeons and physicians. New data has kindled a debate on biliary reconstruction in LT for PSC. Promising data on living donor LT motivate to push the boundaries in this direction.
conclusionCD are excellent indications for liver transplantation since excellent long-term outcomes are achievable when the transplant is performed at the right time. The decisions concerning evaluation, listing, and allocation should be made by an interdisciplinary team of gastroenterologists and transplant surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.