首页> 外文期刊>Annals of Surgery >Adult Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplant (LDLT Versus DDLT) at a Single Center Time to Change Our Paradigm for Liver Transplant
【24h】

Adult Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplant (LDLT Versus DDLT) at a Single Center Time to Change Our Paradigm for Liver Transplant

机译:成人的生活捐赠者与死者肝脏移植(LDLT与DDLT)在单一的时间内改变我们的肝脏移植的范式

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between living donor liver transplant (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) at a single center to demonstrate the advantages of LDLT and provide justification for the increased utilization and application of this procedure. Summary of Background Data: LDLT comprises a very small percentage of all liver transplants performed in the United States, this despite its advantages and a shortage of the availability of deceased donor organs. Methods: A retrospective review of all adult LDLT (n = 245) and DDLT (n = 592) performed at a single center over 10 years (2009-2019), comparing survival outcomes by Kaplan-Meier analysis and comparing other measures of outcome such as recovery times, complications, costs, and resource utilization. Results: Patient survival outcomes were superior in LDLT recipients (3-year 86% vs 80%, P = 0.03). Other outcomes demonstrated shorter length of hospital stay (11 vs 13 days, P = 0.03), less likelihood of intraoperative blood transfusion (52% vs 78%, P < 0.01), and less likelihood of need for posttransplant dialysis (1.6% vs 7.4%, P < 0.01). Early reoperation and biliary/vascular complication rates were similar. Hospital costs related to the transplant were 29.5% lower for LDLT. Complications in living donors were acceptable with no early or late deaths, 3-month reoperation rate of 3.1%, and overall complication rate of 19.5%. Given its advantages, we have expanded LDLT-in 2018, LDLT comprised 53.6% of our transplants (national average 4.8%), and our transplant rate increased from 44.8 (rate per 100-person years) in 2015 to 87.5 in 2018. Conclusions: LDLT offers advantages over DDLT including superior outcomes and less resource utilization. The time has come to change the paradigm of how LDLT is utilized in this country.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是将活体供体肝移植(LDLT)和死者在单一中心的过度供体肝移植(DDLT)之间的结果进行比较,以证明LDLT的优势,并为该程序的利用率和应用提供理由。背景数据摘要:LDLT包括在美国进行的所有肝脏移植量的百分比,尽管其优缺点是死者供体器官的可用性。方法:对所有成年LDLT(N = 245)和DDLT(n = 592)的回顾性审查在10年(2009-2019),比较KAPLAN-MEIER分析并比较其他结果的生存结果作为恢复时间,并发症,成本和资源利用。结果:患者存活结果在LDLT受者中优越(3年86%VS 80%,P = 0.03)。其他结果表明,住院住院长度较短(11次,P = 0.03),术中输血的可能性较小(52%vs 78%,P <0.01),较小的后翻转透析需要较小的可能性(1.6%VS 7.4 %,p <0.01)。早期再转期和胆汁/血管并发症率相似。对于LDLT,与移植相关的医院费用为29.5%。活性捐赠者的并发症是可接受的,没有早期或晚期死亡,3个月的再置分率为3.1%,整体并发症率为19.5%。鉴于其优势,我们已扩大LDLT-IN 2018年,LDLT占我们移植的53.6%(全国平均4.8%),2015年我们的移植率从44.8增加到87.5年。结论:结论: LDLT提供优于DDLT的优势,包括卓越的结果和资源利用率较少。时间来改变这个国家如何利用LDLT的范式。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号