ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
Evaluating diagnosis and clinical outcome for antibody-mediated rejection in liver transplantation: performance of the 2016 Banff Working Group criteria.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) presents a rare but complex challenge following liver transplantation, characterized by histopathologic features lacking specificity. The 2016 Banff Working Group criteria aimed to standardize AMR diagnosis, focusing on histologic findings and C4d staining interpretation. Our retrospective analysis of 463 liver transplant recipients between 2017-2023 identified 13 donor specific antibody (DSA)-positive cases (2.8%) with matched liver biopsy available: 3 (23.1%) were classified as definite AMR, 7 (53.8%) as suspicious, and 3 (23.1%) as indeterminate. The incidence of AMR was found to be only 0.6%. 7 of these 13 cases were clinically treated as mixed AMR and T cell mediated rejection (TCMR), and 4 cases were treated as TCMR. Four cases treated as AMR/TCMR responded well, and no subsequent rejection episodes occurred during the follow-up period (20.3-96.5 months). Three patients failed to respond and expired after biopsy (6 days to 2.5 months), an outcome attributable to other complications in addition to liver dysfunction. Of note, among the cases classified as "definite" according to the Banff criteria, two cases had an h-score of 1. This discordance between h-score and C4d staining suggests diagnostic challenges in current practice, highlighting the necessity for C4d immunostaining in all allograft biopsies with microvasculitis to prevent misdiagnosis. Although integrated evaluation of DSA positivity, histologic pattern of injury, and C4d staining was generally reliable for distinguishing definite/suspicious categories from the indeterminate group, this study argues for further refinement of diagnostic criteria to enhance the accuracy of AMR detection and improve patient outcomes in liver transplantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41483300What 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.