4.4 Article

Extended Ischemia Times Promote Risk of HCC Recurrence in Liver Transplant Patients

Journal

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
Volume 60, Issue 9, Pages 2832-2839

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-015-3541-z

Keywords

Liver transplantation; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Ischemia-reperfusion injury; PET; Ischemia time; Cold ischemia time; Warm ischemia time

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is increasing evidence that ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) promotes vasculogenesis and tumor outgrowth in the liver. Hepatic IRI is exaggerated by prolongation of ischemia times. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to assess the impact of ischemia times on risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Subgroup analysis focused on patients with F-18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (F-18-FDG)-avid HCC on pretransplant positron emission tomography (PET). A total of 103 liver transplant patients with HCC were included in this study. The impact of cold (CIT), warm (WIT), and total ischemia times (TIT) along with other prognostic variables on posttransplant outcome was analyzed in uni- and multivariate analysis. Twenty-four patients (23.3 %) developed tumor relapse after LT. Mean durations of CIT (468.0 vs. 375.5 min; P = 0.001), WIT (58.4 vs. 45.7 min; P = 0.001), and TIT (525.8 vs. 422.0 min; P < 0.001) were significantly longer in patients with compared to those without HCC recurrence. In multivariate regression analysis, F-18-FDG-avid HCC (odds ratio [OR] 73.4), WIT > 50 min (OR 52.5), alpha-fetoprotein level > 400 IU/ml (OR 11.1), and Milan Out status (OR 7.4) were identified as independent predictors of HCC recurrence. In the subgroup of patients with PET-positive HCC, WIT remained the only independent variable to predict HCC recurrence (OR 15.5). Prolongation of ischemia times promotes the risk of HCC recurrence after LT, especially in patients with unfavorable tumor biology on PET imaging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available