Influence of 4 preservation solutions on ICU stay, graft and patient survival following liver transplantation.
Adenosine
Allopurinol
Critical Care
/ statistics & numerical data
Disaccharides
Electrolytes
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Glutamates
Glutathione
Graft Survival
Histidine
Humans
Insulin
Length of Stay
/ statistics & numerical data
Liver Transplantation
/ mortality
Male
Mannitol
Organ Preservation Solutions
Prognosis
Raffinose
Registries
Retrospective Studies
Survival Analysis
Human
Liver transplantation
Multicenter study
Preservation solution
Journal
Journal of visceral surgery
ISSN: 1878-7886
Titre abrégé: J Visc Surg
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101532664
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
25
9
2019
medline:
4
5
2021
entrez:
25
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The goal of this study was to evaluate the prognostic role of four preservation solutions in liver transplantation (LT). This is a retrospective study originating from 22 French centers performing LT, registered in the prospective databank of the Cristal Biomedicine Agency between 2008 and 2013. The preservation solutions used were Celsior (CS), Institut Georges Lopez (IGL)-1, Solution de Conservation des Organes et des Tissus (SCOT) 15 and University of Wisconsin (UW) solutions. Exclusion criteria were preservation with unknown or inhomogeneous solutions, or Histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) solution (representing only 3% of LT). Patient survival was the main endpoint. Secondary endpoints were graft survival and duration of stay in intensive care. Of 6347 LT performed, 4928 were included in this study, for which the distribution of preservation solution was CS (30%), IGL-1 (44%), SCOT 15 (10%) and UW (16%). Patient survival was 86%, 80% and 74% at 1, 3 and 5 years after LT, respectively, without any statistically significant difference between the four solutions (P=0.78). Graft survival was 82%, 75% and 69% at 1, 3 and 5 years after LT, respectively, without any statistically significant difference between the four solutions (P=0.80). Duration of intensive care was different according to the solution used in univariate analysis (P<0.001), but this effect disappeared in multivariate analysis when the center performing the transplantation was accounted for. The type of preservation solution used (CS, IGL-1, SCOT 15 or UW) did not have any influence on patient or graft survival after LT.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31548152
pii: S1878-7886(19)30135-3
doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2019.09.001
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Celsior
0
Disaccharides
0
Electrolytes
0
Glutamates
0
IGL-1 solution
0
Insulin
0
Organ Preservation Solutions
0
University of Wisconsin-lactobionate solution
0
Mannitol
3OWL53L36A
Histidine
4QD397987E
Allopurinol
63CZ7GJN5I
Glutathione
GAN16C9B8O
Adenosine
K72T3FS567
Raffinose
N5O3QU595M
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
87-97Investigateurs
A Mallet
(A)
D Cherqui
(D)
R Adam
(R)
O Ciacio
(O)
G Pittau
(G)
B Trechot
(B)
K Boudjema
(K)
P Houssel-Debry
(P)
A Merdignac
(A)
M Rayar
(M)
O Soubrane
(O)
S Dokmak
(S)
F Dondero
(F)
A Sepulveda
(A)
P Bachellier
(P)
P-F Addeo
(PF)
F Faitot
(F)
F Navarro
(F)
A Herrero
(A)
S Jaber
(S)
G-P Pageaux
(GP)
J-C Vaillant
(JC)
G Rousseau
(G)
J-M Siksik
(JM)
Y P Le Treut
(YP)
E Gregoire
(E)
J Hardwigsen
(J)
P Compagnon
(P)
C Lim
(C)
C Salloum
(C)
M Chirica
(M)
J Abba
(J)
C Letoublon
(C)
F-R Pruvot
(FR)
E Boleslawski
(E)
E Salame
(E)
L Barbier
(L)
J Y Mabrut
(JY)
K Mohkam
(K)
B Suc
(B)
C Maulat
(C)
L Chiche
(L)
C Laurent
(C)
F Jeune
(F)
F Perdigao
(F)
T Dao
(T)
A Mulliri
(A)
J Gugenheim
(J)
O Boilot
(O)
E Buc
(E)
S Branchereau
(S)
C Chardot
(C)
B Heyd
(B)
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.