BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032022000100129 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Background Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is the first choice, but living donor transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to be considered in special situations, such as lack of donated organs and emergencies. So far, there is no consensus on which transplantation method provides better survival and fewer complications, which is still an open point for discussion. Methods This meta-analysis compared the 1, 3, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates of LDLT and DDLT. We included studies published from April-2009 to June-2021 and adopted the generic model of the inverse of variance for the random effect of hazard ratios. The adequacy of the studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale — NOS (WELLS). Results For patient survival analysis, we included a total of 32,258 subjects. We found a statistically significant better survival for the LDLT group at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively: 1.35 HR (95%CI 1.10—1.66, P=0.005), 1.26 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.46, P=0.002) and 1.27 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.48, P=0.002). Our meta-analysis evaluated a total of 21,276 grafts. In the overall analysis, the 1-year survival was improved in favor of the LDLT group (1.36 HR, 95%CI 1.16—1.60, P<0.0001), while the 3-year survival (1.13 HR, 95%CI 0.96—1.33, P<0.13), and 5 (0.99 HR, 95%CI 0.74—1.33, P<0.96), did not differ significantly. Conclusion This metanalysis detected a statistically significant greater 1-, 3- and 5-years patient survival favoring LDLT compared to DDLT as well as a statistically significant difference better 1-year graft survival favoring the LDLT group. |
id |
IBEPEGE-1_1df86143a8439aa5a42c13016d3cdc7a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0004-28032022000100129 |
network_acronym_str |
IBEPEGE-1 |
network_name_str |
Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSISLiver transplantationliving donor liver transplantationdeceased donor liver transplantationABSTRACT Background Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is the first choice, but living donor transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to be considered in special situations, such as lack of donated organs and emergencies. So far, there is no consensus on which transplantation method provides better survival and fewer complications, which is still an open point for discussion. Methods This meta-analysis compared the 1, 3, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates of LDLT and DDLT. We included studies published from April-2009 to June-2021 and adopted the generic model of the inverse of variance for the random effect of hazard ratios. The adequacy of the studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale — NOS (WELLS). Results For patient survival analysis, we included a total of 32,258 subjects. We found a statistically significant better survival for the LDLT group at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively: 1.35 HR (95%CI 1.10—1.66, P=0.005), 1.26 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.46, P=0.002) and 1.27 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.48, P=0.002). Our meta-analysis evaluated a total of 21,276 grafts. In the overall analysis, the 1-year survival was improved in favor of the LDLT group (1.36 HR, 95%CI 1.16—1.60, P<0.0001), while the 3-year survival (1.13 HR, 95%CI 0.96—1.33, P<0.13), and 5 (0.99 HR, 95%CI 0.74—1.33, P<0.96), did not differ significantly. Conclusion This metanalysis detected a statistically significant greater 1-, 3- and 5-years patient survival favoring LDLT compared to DDLT as well as a statistically significant difference better 1-year graft survival favoring the LDLT group.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2022-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032022000100129Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.59 n.1 2022reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/s0004-2803.202200001-22info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCAVALCANTE,Lourianne NascimentoQUEIROZ,Renato Macedo Teixeira dePAZ,Cláudio Luiz da S LLYRA,André Castroeng2022-04-12T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032022000100129Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2022-04-12T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
title |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
spellingShingle |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS CAVALCANTE,Lourianne Nascimento Liver transplantation living donor liver transplantation deceased donor liver transplantation |
title_short |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
title_full |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
title_fullStr |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
title_full_unstemmed |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
title_sort |
BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS |
author |
CAVALCANTE,Lourianne Nascimento |
author_facet |
CAVALCANTE,Lourianne Nascimento QUEIROZ,Renato Macedo Teixeira de PAZ,Cláudio Luiz da S L LYRA,André Castro |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
QUEIROZ,Renato Macedo Teixeira de PAZ,Cláudio Luiz da S L LYRA,André Castro |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
CAVALCANTE,Lourianne Nascimento QUEIROZ,Renato Macedo Teixeira de PAZ,Cláudio Luiz da S L LYRA,André Castro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Liver transplantation living donor liver transplantation deceased donor liver transplantation |
topic |
Liver transplantation living donor liver transplantation deceased donor liver transplantation |
description |
ABSTRACT Background Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is the first choice, but living donor transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to be considered in special situations, such as lack of donated organs and emergencies. So far, there is no consensus on which transplantation method provides better survival and fewer complications, which is still an open point for discussion. Methods This meta-analysis compared the 1, 3, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates of LDLT and DDLT. We included studies published from April-2009 to June-2021 and adopted the generic model of the inverse of variance for the random effect of hazard ratios. The adequacy of the studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale — NOS (WELLS). Results For patient survival analysis, we included a total of 32,258 subjects. We found a statistically significant better survival for the LDLT group at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively: 1.35 HR (95%CI 1.10—1.66, P=0.005), 1.26 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.46, P=0.002) and 1.27 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.48, P=0.002). Our meta-analysis evaluated a total of 21,276 grafts. In the overall analysis, the 1-year survival was improved in favor of the LDLT group (1.36 HR, 95%CI 1.16—1.60, P<0.0001), while the 3-year survival (1.13 HR, 95%CI 0.96—1.33, P<0.13), and 5 (0.99 HR, 95%CI 0.74—1.33, P<0.96), did not differ significantly. Conclusion This metanalysis detected a statistically significant greater 1-, 3- and 5-years patient survival favoring LDLT compared to DDLT as well as a statistically significant difference better 1-year graft survival favoring the LDLT group. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-03-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032022000100129 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032022000100129 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/s0004-2803.202200001-22 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.59 n.1 2022 reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia instacron:IBEPEGE |
instname_str |
Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia |
instacron_str |
IBEPEGE |
institution |
IBEPEGE |
reponame_str |
Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) |
collection |
Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br |
_version_ |
1754193351447412736 |