ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental hepatology
Algorithmic Approach to Deranged Liver Functions After Transplantation.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental hepatology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Common Language for Post-Transplant Anastomotic Biliary Strictures: Standardized Endoscopic Outcome Definitions and a Failure-Mode Roadmap.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Fibrosis in One-Year Protocol Biopsies After Liver Transplantation Is Associated With Graft Loss: A Multicenter Cohort Study.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Endohepatology: Evolving Indications, Challenges, Unmet Needs and Opportunities.Gastro hep advances · 2026Review
- Research advances on NLRP3 inflammasomes in organ transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Predictive role of laboratory assessments and interval radiological imaging in adverse thrombohemorrhagic outcomes in living donor liver transplantation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver transplant (LT) recipients require close follow-up with regular monitoring of the liver function tests (LFTs). Evaluation of deranged LFT should be individualized depending upon the time since LT, peri-operative events, clinical course, and any complications. These derangements can range from mild and asymptomatic to severe and symptomatic elevations requiring expedited personalized assessment and management. Pattern of LFT derangement (hepatocellular, cholestatic, or mixed), donor-recipient risk factors, timing after LT (post-operative, 1-12 months, and >12 months since LT) along with clinical context and symptomatology are important considerations before proceeding with the initial evaluation. Compliance to immunosuppression and drug interactions should be ascertained along with local epidemiology of infections. Essential initial evaluation must include an ultrasound abdomen with Doppler to rule out any structural causes such as biliary or vascular complications apart from focussed laboratory evaluation. Early allograft dysfunction, ischemia reperfusion injury, small-for-size syndrome, biliary leaks, hepatic artery, and portal vein thrombosis are usual culprits in the early post-operative period whereas viral hepatitis (acute or reactivation), opportunistic infections, and recurrence of the primary disease are more frequent in the later period. Graft rejection, biliary strictures, sepsis, and drug induced liver injury remain possible etiologies at all times points after LT. Initial evaluation algorithm must be customized based on history, clinical examination, risk factors, and pattern and severity of deranged LFT. Allograft rejection is a diagnosis of exclusion and requires liver biopsy to confirm and assess severity. Empirical treatment of rejection sans liver biopsy is discouraged.
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.