According to transplant registries, grafts from elderly donors have lower survival rates. During 1999-2005, we evaluated the outcomes of 89 patients who received a liver from a donor aged > or = 60 years and managed with the low liver-damage strategy (LLDS), based on the preoperative donor liver biopsy and the shortest possible ischemia time (group D > or = 60-LLDS). Group D > or = 60-LLDS was compared with 198 matched recipients, whose grafts were not managed with this strategy (89 donors < 60 years, group D < 60-no-LLDS and 89 donors aged > or =60 years, group D > or = 60-no-LLDS). In the donors proposed from the age group of > or =60 years, the number of donors rejected decreased during the study period and the LLDS was found to be responsible for this in a significant manner (47% vs. 60%, respectively P < 0.01). Among the recipients transplanted, the clinical features (age, gender, viral infection, child and model for end-stage liver disease score) were comparable among groups, but group D > or = 60-LLDS had a lower mean ischemia time: 415 +/- 106 min vs. 465 +/- 111 (D < 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05 and vs. 476 +/- 94 (D > or = 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05. After a median follow-up of 3 years, the 1- and 3-year graft survival rates of group D > or = 60-LLDS (84% and 76%) were comparable with group D < 60-no-LLDS (89% and 76%) and were significantly higher than group D > or = 60-no-LLDS (71% and 54%), P < 0.005. In conclusion, the LLDS optimized the use of livers from elderly donors.

Liver transplantations with donors aged 60 years and above: the low liver damage strategy / Ravaioli, M; Grazi, Gl; Cescon, M; Cucchetti, A; Ercolani, G; Fiorentino, M; Panzini, I; Vivarelli, Marco; Ramacciato, G; DEL GAUDIO, M; Vetrone, G; Zanello, M; Dazzi, A; Zanfi, C; DI GIOIA, P; Bertuzzo, V; Lauro, A; Morelli, C; Pinna, Ad. - In: TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 0934-0874. - STAMPA. - 22:(2009), pp. 423-433. [10.1111/j.1432-2277.2008.00812.x  ]

Liver transplantations with donors aged 60 years and above: the low liver damage strategy

VIVARELLI, MARCO;
2009-01-01

Abstract

According to transplant registries, grafts from elderly donors have lower survival rates. During 1999-2005, we evaluated the outcomes of 89 patients who received a liver from a donor aged > or = 60 years and managed with the low liver-damage strategy (LLDS), based on the preoperative donor liver biopsy and the shortest possible ischemia time (group D > or = 60-LLDS). Group D > or = 60-LLDS was compared with 198 matched recipients, whose grafts were not managed with this strategy (89 donors < 60 years, group D < 60-no-LLDS and 89 donors aged > or =60 years, group D > or = 60-no-LLDS). In the donors proposed from the age group of > or =60 years, the number of donors rejected decreased during the study period and the LLDS was found to be responsible for this in a significant manner (47% vs. 60%, respectively P < 0.01). Among the recipients transplanted, the clinical features (age, gender, viral infection, child and model for end-stage liver disease score) were comparable among groups, but group D > or = 60-LLDS had a lower mean ischemia time: 415 +/- 106 min vs. 465 +/- 111 (D < 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05 and vs. 476 +/- 94 (D > or = 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05. After a median follow-up of 3 years, the 1- and 3-year graft survival rates of group D > or = 60-LLDS (84% and 76%) were comparable with group D < 60-no-LLDS (89% and 76%) and were significantly higher than group D > or = 60-no-LLDS (71% and 54%), P < 0.005. In conclusion, the LLDS optimized the use of livers from elderly donors.
2009
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: https://hdl.handle.net/11566/84810
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 7
  • Scopus 52
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 45
social impact