In situ split liver extended right grafts (SL-ERGs) are still considered marginal grafts. Our aim was to verify this statement at the present time. From 1997 to 2011, a multicenter, retrospective study based on a prospective database was performed at 9 liver transplantation (LT) centers in northern Italy; it included 382 in situ SL-ERG transplants in adults. There were 358 primary LTs and 24 retransplantations (RETXs). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall graft survival rate for LT with in situ SL-ERGs were 73.5%, 63.3%, and 60.7%, respectively, from 1997 to 2004 and 83.5%, 80.3%, and 80.3%, respectively, thereafter (P=0.0001). A shorter total ischemia time and fewer RETX grafts were the main differences between the characteristics of the 2 periods. From 1997 to 2011, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates showed a significant difference between the 358 primary LT in situ SL-ERGs and the 24 RETX in situ SL-ERGs (P<0.001). In a multivariate analysis, the main prognostic factor for 60-day graft survival was a total ischemia time<8 hours for the 358 primary in situ SL-ERGs. From 2005 to 2011, in 2473 LTs, the 5-year graft survival for 184 in situ SL-ERGs and 2289 whole grafts was 75% and 80% (P=0.3), respectively. Univariate and multivariate studies alike failed to indicate that the type of graft was a prognostic factor for graft survival. A donor age>60 years, RETX grafts, and urgency were the main prognostic factors for failure for all of the grafts. Although caution should be taken regarding the choice of appropriate donors, in situ SL-ERGs should no longer be considered marginal grafts for experienced LT centers. SL-ERGs should not be used in RETX settings, and when SL-ERGs are used as primary grafts, the total ischemia time should be less than 8 hours.

Fifteen years and 382 extended right grafts from in situ split livers in a multicenter study: Are these still extended criteria liver grafts?

Baccarani, U;Risaliti, A
2015

Abstract

In situ split liver extended right grafts (SL-ERGs) are still considered marginal grafts. Our aim was to verify this statement at the present time. From 1997 to 2011, a multicenter, retrospective study based on a prospective database was performed at 9 liver transplantation (LT) centers in northern Italy; it included 382 in situ SL-ERG transplants in adults. There were 358 primary LTs and 24 retransplantations (RETXs). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall graft survival rate for LT with in situ SL-ERGs were 73.5%, 63.3%, and 60.7%, respectively, from 1997 to 2004 and 83.5%, 80.3%, and 80.3%, respectively, thereafter (P=0.0001). A shorter total ischemia time and fewer RETX grafts were the main differences between the characteristics of the 2 periods. From 1997 to 2011, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates showed a significant difference between the 358 primary LT in situ SL-ERGs and the 24 RETX in situ SL-ERGs (P<0.001). In a multivariate analysis, the main prognostic factor for 60-day graft survival was a total ischemia time<8 hours for the 358 primary in situ SL-ERGs. From 2005 to 2011, in 2473 LTs, the 5-year graft survival for 184 in situ SL-ERGs and 2289 whole grafts was 75% and 80% (P=0.3), respectively. Univariate and multivariate studies alike failed to indicate that the type of graft was a prognostic factor for graft survival. A donor age>60 years, RETX grafts, and urgency were the main prognostic factors for failure for all of the grafts. Although caution should be taken regarding the choice of appropriate donors, in situ SL-ERGs should no longer be considered marginal grafts for experienced LT centers. SL-ERGs should not be used in RETX settings, and when SL-ERGs are used as primary grafts, the total ischemia time should be less than 8 hours.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11390/1086596
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 20
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 20
social impact