File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1002/bjs.5528
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-33846455773
- PMID: 17016793
- WOS: WOS:000243741300014
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation for early irresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Title | Living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation for early irresectable hepatocellular carcinoma |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2007 |
Publisher | John Wiley & Sons Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bjs.co.uk |
Citation | British Journal Of Surgery, 2007, v. 94 n. 1, p. 78-86 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Background: Hypothetical studies that favour living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) assumed a comparable outcome after LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome after LDLT with that after DDLT, and to identify factors that might account for any differences. Methods: The study included 60 patients who met the radiological Milan or University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) criteria and underwent LDLT (43 patients) or DDLT (17). Results: The LDLT group had fewer incidental tumours and a lower rate of pretransplant transarterial chemoembolization but a higher rate of salvage transplantation. Waiting time was shorter and graft weight to standard liver weight (GW:SLW) ratio was lower in this group. The perioperative course, and histopathological tumour size, number, grade and stage were comparable. Median follow-up was 33 (range 4-120) months. The cumulative 5-year recurrence rate was 29 per cent in the LDLT group and 0 per cent in the DDLT group (P = 0.029). A GW:SLW ratio of 0.6 or less, salvage transplantation, three or more tumour nodules, microscopic vascular invasion, and pathological stage beyond the Milan or UCSF criteria were significant confounding risk factors. Multivariable analysis identified salvage transplantation (relative risk 5.16 (95 percent confidence interval (c.i.) 1.48 to 18.02); P = 0.010) and pathological stage beyond the UCSF criteria (relative risk 4.10 (95 per cent c.i. 1.02 to 16.48); P = 0.047) as independent predictors of recurrence. Conclusion: Despite standard radiological selection criteria based on number and size, patients who underwent LDLT for HCC had more recurrence because of selection bias for other clinical characteristics. Copyright © 2006 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/88388 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 8.6 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.148 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Lo, CM | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Fan, ST | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Liu, CL | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Chan, SC | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Ng, IOL | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Wong, J | en_HK |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-09-06T09:42:43Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-09-06T09:42:43Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2007 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.citation | British Journal Of Surgery, 2007, v. 94 n. 1, p. 78-86 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.issn | 0007-1323 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/88388 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Hypothetical studies that favour living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) assumed a comparable outcome after LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome after LDLT with that after DDLT, and to identify factors that might account for any differences. Methods: The study included 60 patients who met the radiological Milan or University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) criteria and underwent LDLT (43 patients) or DDLT (17). Results: The LDLT group had fewer incidental tumours and a lower rate of pretransplant transarterial chemoembolization but a higher rate of salvage transplantation. Waiting time was shorter and graft weight to standard liver weight (GW:SLW) ratio was lower in this group. The perioperative course, and histopathological tumour size, number, grade and stage were comparable. Median follow-up was 33 (range 4-120) months. The cumulative 5-year recurrence rate was 29 per cent in the LDLT group and 0 per cent in the DDLT group (P = 0.029). A GW:SLW ratio of 0.6 or less, salvage transplantation, three or more tumour nodules, microscopic vascular invasion, and pathological stage beyond the Milan or UCSF criteria were significant confounding risk factors. Multivariable analysis identified salvage transplantation (relative risk 5.16 (95 percent confidence interval (c.i.) 1.48 to 18.02); P = 0.010) and pathological stage beyond the UCSF criteria (relative risk 4.10 (95 per cent c.i. 1.02 to 16.48); P = 0.047) as independent predictors of recurrence. Conclusion: Despite standard radiological selection criteria based on number and size, patients who underwent LDLT for HCC had more recurrence because of selection bias for other clinical characteristics. Copyright © 2006 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. | en_HK |
dc.language | eng | en_HK |
dc.publisher | John Wiley & Sons Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bjs.co.uk | en_HK |
dc.relation.ispartof | British Journal of Surgery | en_HK |
dc.rights | British Journal of Surgery. Copyright © John Wiley & Sons Ltd. | en_HK |
dc.rights | Special Statement for Preprint only Before publication: 'This is a preprint of an article accepted for publication in [The Journal of Pathology] Copyright © ([year]) ([Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland])'. After publication: the preprint notice should be amended to follows: 'This is a preprint of an article published in [include the complete citation information for the final version of the Contribution as published in the print edition of the Journal]' For Cochrane Library/ Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, add statement & acknowledgement : ‘This review is published as a Cochrane Review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 20XX, Issue X. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.’ Please include reference to the Review and hyperlink to the original version using the following format e.g. Authors. Title of Review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 20XX, Issue #. Art. No.: CD00XXXX. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD00XXXX (insert persistent link to the article by using the URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD00XXXX) (This statement should refer to the most recent issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in which the Review published.) | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Carcinoma, Hepatocellular - pathology - surgery | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Liver Neoplasms - pathology - surgery | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Liver Transplantation - methods - pathology | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Living Donors | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Postoperative Complications - etiology | - |
dc.title | Living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation for early irresectable hepatocellular carcinoma | en_HK |
dc.type | Article | en_HK |
dc.identifier.openurl | http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0007-1323&volume=94&issue=1&spage=78&epage=86&date=2007&atitle=Living+donor+versus+deceased+donor+liver+transplantation+for+early+irresectable+hepatocellular+carcinoma | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Lo, CM: chungmlo@hkucc.hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Fan, ST: stfan@hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Chan, SC: chanlsc@hkucc.hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Ng, IOL: iolng@hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Wong, J: jwong@hkucc.hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Lo, CM=rp00412 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Fan, ST=rp00355 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Chan, SC=rp01568 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Ng, IOL=rp00335 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Wong, J=rp00322 | en_HK |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/bjs.5528 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.pmid | 17016793 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-33846455773 | en_HK |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33846455773&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_HK |
dc.identifier.volume | 94 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.spage | 78 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.epage | 86 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000243741300014 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United Kingdom | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Lo, CM=7401771672 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Fan, ST=7402678224 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Liu, CL=7409789712 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Chan, SC=7404255575 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Ng, IOL=7102753722 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Wong, J=8049324500 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.citeulike | 1039108 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0007-1323 | - |