ArticleBMC surgery2024
Effect of liver transplants with retrograde reperfusion on early postoperative recovery of liver function and its risk factors.
Article in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate effect of liver Transplants (LT) with retrograde reperfusion on early postoperative recovery of liver function and its risk factors.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical data from 136 liver transplantation (LT) patients at the 900th Hospital of the Chinese People's Liberation Army Joint Support Army, covering the period from January 2015 to January 2021. All participants provided informed consent, adhering to medical ethics guidelines. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the liver perfusion technique used: retrograde reperfusion (RTR, n = 108) and initial portal reperfusion (IPR, n = 28). Our study focused on a subset of 23 patients from each group to compare postoperative liver function recovery. The final analysis included 86 RTR and 28 IPR cases after excluding 8 RTR patients who underwent initial hepatic artery reperfusion and 14 who received simultaneous hepatic artery and portal vein reperfusion. Further subdivision within the RTR group identified 19 patients with early hepatic allograft dysfunction (EAD) and 67 without, allowing for an assessment of the influence of preoperative and intraoperative parameters, as well as perfusion methods, on EAD incidence post-LT.
resultsAlanine aminotransferase (ALT) was 329 (211 ~ 548) and 176 (98 ~ 282) U/L on the 3rd and 7th day after RTR, respectively, which was significantly lower than 451 (288 ~ 918) and 251 (147 ~ 430) U/L in the IPR group (Z =-1.979, -2.299, P = 0.048, 0.021). Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) on postoperative days 3, 5, and 7 was 252 (193, 522), 105 (79, 163), and 93 (41, 135) U/L in the RTR group, respectively; it was also significantly lower than 328 (251, 724), 179 (129, 306), and 150 (91, 200)U/L in the IPR group (Z=-2.212, -3.221, -2.979; P = 0.027, 0.001, 0.003). Logistic regression analysis showed that MELD score was an independent risk factor for EAD after LT.
conclusionRTR LT is more favorable for patients' early postoperative liver function recovery. For patients undergoing LT for RTR, preoperative MELD score was an independent risk factor for their postoperative development of EAD.
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.