Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33602890›Full record

ArticleAnnals of transplantation2021

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Different Reperfusion Sequences in Liver Transplantation.

Ann-Kathrin Eichelmann, Thomas Vogel, Ann-Kathrin Fuchs, Philipp Houben, Shadi Katou, Felix Becker, Hartmut H Schmidt, Christian Wilms, Andreas Pascher, Jens G Brockmann

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of transplantation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ann-Kathrin EichelmannDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Thomas VogelDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Ann-Kathrin FuchsDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Philipp HoubenDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Shadi KatouDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Felix BeckerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Hartmut H SchmidtDepartment of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Christian WilmsDepartment of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Andreas PascherDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jens G BrockmannDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
University Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Although most centers perform primary portal vein reperfusion (PV) in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for historical reasons, there is so far no sound evidence as to whether this technique is superior. The present study evaluated the long-term outcome of 3 different reperfusion sequences: PV vs primary arterial (A) vs simultaneous reperfusion (SIM). MATERIAL AND METHODS All patients at our center who underwent OLT (who received a primary, whole-organ liver graft) from 2006 to 2007 were evaluated for analysis. RESULTS A total of 61 patients were found eligible (PV: 25, A: 22, SIM: 14). Twenty-one patients (35%) were still alive after the follow-up period of 12 years. Despite poorer starting conditions such as higher recipient age (59 y (SIM) vs 55 y (A) vs 50 y (PV), P=0.01) and donor age (56 y (SIM) vs 51 y (PV) vs 50 y (A), n.s.), higher MELD scores (22 vs 19 (PV) vs 17 (A), n.s.), as well as a higher number of marginal donor organs (79% (SIM) vs 36% (A/PV), P=0.02), SIM-recipients demonstrated superior outcomes. Overall survival was 8.1 y (SIM), 4.8 y (PV), and 5.9 y (A, n.s.)). None of the SIM-recipients underwent re-transplantation, while the rate was 32% in the PV-group. The 8.1 y graft survival in SIM-recipients was significantly longer than in the other 2 groups, which were 3.3 y (PV) and 5.5 y (A, P=0.013). CONCLUSIONS Although SIM-reperfused recipients were the oldest and received grafts of inferior quality, these recipients showed superior results in terms of overall patient and graft survival. Multicentric randomized controlled trials with larger study populations are required to confirm this finding.

Indexed as

Liver TransplantationAdultAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularEnd Stage Liver DiseaseFemaleGraft SurvivalHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedReperfusionRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID33602890
PMCPMC7901155
OpenAlexW3129437985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.