4.6 Article

Conventional Split Liver Transplantation for Two Adult Recipients: A Recent Experience in a Single European Center

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION
卷 88, 期 9, 页码 1117-1122

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181ba1096

关键词

Partial grafts; Deceased donors; Adult recipients; MELD score

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Split liver transplantation (SLT) for two adult recipients is still considered a challenging procedure, especially when subjected to model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-based allocation criteria. Methods. Twenty-two SLTs were performed in adult recipients in a European center operating within a MELD-oriented system. Thirteen right-sided grafts and nine left-sided grafts were used. Right-sided grafts included I I extended right grafts and two full right grafts. Left-sided grafts included six left lateral segment grafts and three full left grafts. Ninety-three percent of donors were allocated based on MELD score. Median graft-to-recipient body weight ratio was 1.53 (range 1.07-2.11) with right-sided grafts and 0.81 (range 0.67-1.11) with left-sided grafts. Liver cirrhosis (46%) and metabolic/genetic disorders (56%) were the main indications for transplant in recipients of right and left grafts, respectively. Results. Overall patient and graft survival were 90% and 86%. Patient survival was 84% in recipients of right grafts and 100% in recipients of left grafts. Graft survival was 84% and 89%, respectively. Vascular and biliary complications Occurred in 14% and 4% of cases. Postoperative serum levels of total bilirubin were significantly higher in recipients of left-sided grafts versus right-sided grafts on postoperative days 7 and 14. Prothrombin activity was significantly lower in recipients of left-sided grafts versus right-sided grafts on postoperative days 3 and 7. Conclusions. SLT for two adult recipients can be successfully performed even using left lateral segments by assigning one graft according to MELD score, and with a more liberal allocation of the second graft.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据