Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33754656›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021

Are the criteria always right? Assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma cases in living donor liver transplantation at a high-volume center

Yücel Yankol, Gültekin Hoş, Turan Kanmaz, Nesimi Mecit, Yılmaz Çakaloğlu, Münci Kalayoğlu, Koray Sadık Acarlı

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Yücel YankolDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States, Organ Transplant Center, Memorial Şişli Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.
Gültekin HoşDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States, Department of Surgery, Şişli Etfal Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.
Turan KanmazDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States, Organ Transplant Center, School of Medicine, Koç University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Nesimi MecitDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States, Organ Transplant Center, School of Medicine, Koç University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Yılmaz ÇakaloğluDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States.
Münci KalayoğluDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States, Organ Transplant Center, School of Medicine, Koç University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Koray Sadık AcarlıDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USKoç University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: With the increased experience in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), it has been adopted for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with emerging discussions of criteria beyond tumor size and number. In contrast to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT), recipient selection for LDLT is not limited by organ allocation systems. We discuss herein the assessment, criteria, and experience with liver transplantation (LT) in HCC cases at a high-volume LDLT center. Material and methods: Between August 2006 and December 2017, 191 adult LT HCC recipients with at least one-year follow-up were retrospectively analyzed. Results: In 191 patients, one-, three- and five-year survival rates were 87.2%, 81.6%, and 76.2%, respectively, including early postoperative mortality. In 174 patients with long-term follow-up, one-, three- and five-year disease-free survival rates were 91.6%, 87.7%, and 84.4%, respectively. When multivariate analysis was utilized, tumor differentiation was the only factor which statistically affected survival (p = 0.025). Conclusion: LDLT allows us to push the limits forward and the question “Are the criteria always right?” is always on the table. We can conclude that, with the advantage of LDLT, every HCC patient deserves a case-by-case basis discussion for LT under scientific literature support. In borderline cases, tumor biopsy might help determine the decision for LT.

Indexed as

Liver TransplantationAdolescentAdultAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleHumansLiver NeoplasmsLiving DonorsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomecriteriaHepatocellular carcinomaliving donor liver transplantationoutcomes

Identifiers

PMID33754656
PMCPMC8742484
OpenAlexW3136511287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.