ArticleAnnals of transplantation2017
Significance of Proper Graft Selection in Adult Living-Donor Liver Transplant Recipients with Preoperative Deteriorated Condition.
Article in Annals of transplantation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on "Living Donor Liver Transplantation With Augmented Venous Outflow and Splenectomy: A Promised Land for Small Left Lobe Grafts".Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The outcome of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is poor for recipients with severely deteriorated preoperative condition. This study therefore evaluated the proper graft selection according to the recipients' preoperative condition. MATERIAL AND METHODS We evaluated the clinical outcomes in 66 patients who underwent adult LDLT from October 2003 to June 2016 in our institution, excluding fulminant liver failure and ABO-incompatible cases. Preoperative risk factors included MELD score >20, preoperative hospitalization for over 2 weeks or intensive care unit admission and bacterial infection within 1 month before LDLT. Patients were classified into those with 0-1 risk factors (Group LR, n=44) and those with 2-3 risk factors (Group HR, n=22). RESULTS The overall survival (OS) rate after LDLT was significantly lower in Group HR than in Group LR (1-year: HR 83.9% vs. LR 93%, 3-year: HR 70.8% vs. LR 90.5%, 5-year: HR 62% vs. LR 87.6%; p=0.029). In Group LR, OS rates did not differ significantly by graft type or donor age. In Group HR, OS rates at 1 (93.8% vs. 66.7%), 3 (85.2% vs. 50%), and 5 (75.8% vs. 25%) years were significantly higher using right (n=16) vs. left (n=6) lobe grafts (p=0.046). CONCLUSIONS Proper graft selection is very important to improve the outcome of LDLT recipients in deteriorated preoperative condition. LDLT using right-lobe grafts may be recommended for high-risk severely deteriorated patients.
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.