Premium
Extended criteria donors in liver transplant candidates with hepatorenal syndrome
Author(s) -
Briceño Javier,
Ciria Ruben,
de la Mata Manuel,
Montero José Luis,
Rufián Sebastián,
LópezCillero Pedro
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
clinical transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1399-0012
pISSN - 0902-0063
DOI - 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2011.01402.x
Subject(s) - medicine , creatinine , hepatorenal syndrome , steatosis , gastroenterology , cirrhosis , hazard ratio , hemodialysis , univariate analysis , transplantation , liver transplantation , proportional hazards model , surgery , confidence interval , multivariate analysis
Briceño J, Ciria R, de la Mata M, Montero JL, Rufián S, López‐Cillero P. Extended criteria donors in liver transplant candidates with hepatorenal syndrome.
Clin Transplant 2011: 25: E257–E263. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a complication of cirrhosis with a poor prognosis without transplantation. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of extended criteria donors (ECD) on the postoperative outcome of recipients with HRS. The last 498 patients were divided according to pre‐transplant type 1 or 2 HRS. Sixty‐six (13.25%) recipients fulfilled HRS criteria. Three‐month graft survival was 84% with at‐listing recipient serum creatinine ranging from 0–0.8 mg/dL; 80% with s‐creatinine = 0.9–1.5 mg/dL; 79% with s‐creatinine = 1.6–2.5 mg/dL; and 58% with s‐creatinine >2.6 mg/dL (log‐rank = 18.039; p = 0.001). Recipients with HRS presented higher levels of pre‐transplant creatinine and lower levels of sodium, more episodes of hemodialysis and ascitis, and higher model of end‐stage liver disease‐scores. Three‐month graft survival in recipients with HRS relative to ECD‐variables showed differences in univariate analysis according to graft steatosis (85% in absent steatosis = 0–10%; 78% in mild steatosis = 10–30%; 76% in moderate steatosis = 30–60%; and 49% when severe steatosis >60%; log‐rank = 5.146; p = 0.023). Cox‐proportional‐hazard‐model revealed that graft macrosteatosis per‐30%‐increments (p = 0.000; HR = 1.303 [1.24–1.33] per‐30%‐increment) and donors >65 yr (p = 0.089; HR = 1.622 [1.17–1.94]) were independent predictors of graft loss in recipients with HRS. In conclusion, the use of ECD in recipients with cirrhosis and HRS is a good option. However, grafts from moderate‐to‐severe steatosis and those from aged donors must be carefully allocated in candidates with HRS.