Graft function and outcome of older (>=60 years) donor livers

被引:77
作者
Washburn, WK [1 ]
Johnson, LB [1 ]
Lewis, WD [1 ]
Jenkins, RL [1 ]
机构
[1] HARVARD UNIV,NEW ENGLAND DEACONESS HOSP,SCH MED,DIV LIVER TRANSPLANTAT & HEPATOBILIARY SURG,BOSTON,MA 02215
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00007890-199604150-00013
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Livers from donors greater than or equal to 60 years of age are often considered inadequate for transplantation by many centers. With waiting times exceeding 1 year in our region, we have aggressively used livers form this donor age group. Between 1990 and 1994, 209 patients received 223 liver grafts at our institution. Of these, 29 (13%) were from donors greater than or equal to 60 years of age (group A) and 194 (87%) were form donors <60 years of age (group B). The two groups were matched for recipient diagnosis and severity of disease. Group A and B donors had similar liver, renal, and hematologic studies prior to donation. Weight, sex, race, and vasopressor requirement were also similar. Postoperative alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and prothrombin time were not significantly different over the first 10 postoperative days. Group A grafts were significantly more cholestatic than group B grafts on postoperative days 6-10. The retransplantation rate for primary graft nonfunction was not significantly different between groups A (6.7%) and group B (3.4%; P = 0.40). Patients and graft survival rates at 1 year were 58.6% and 44.8% for group A and 79.2% and 74.5% for group B (P<0.001 for both). Four of 12 deaths in the first year in group A were completely unrelated to graft function. If these are excluded, patients and graft survival rates were 68% and 52%, which are better but still significantly less than in group B. Initial graft function of older donor livers was similar to that of the matched younger group. However, patients and graft survival rates were significantly worse for the older donors, even when corrected for unrelated deaths. Livers should not be discarded based on age alone without inspection and/or biopsy to rule out significant steatosis. Prompt retransplantation for primary graft nonfunction of older donors will optimize recipient survival. Grafts from older donors are generally more cholestatic than those from the younger donor age group; however, many of them function quite well. At the present time, given the inability to identify donor variables associated with decreased recipient survival, we recommend cautions use or older grafts in healthier recipients.
引用
收藏
页码:1062 / 1066
页数:5
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
ADAM R, 1991, TRANSPLANT P, V23, P2602
[2]  
ADAM R, 1995, TRANSPLANT P, V27, P1181
[3]   THE USE OF MARGINAL DONORS FOR ORGAN-TRANSPLANTATION - THE INFLUENCE OF DONOR AGE ON OUTCOME [J].
ALEXANDER, JW ;
VAUGHN, WK .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1991, 51 (01) :135-141
[4]   APPLICATION OF REDUCED-SIZE LIVER-TRANSPLANTS AS SPLIT GRAFTS, AUXILIARY ORTHOTOPIC GRAFTS, AND LIVING RELATED SEGMENTAL TRANSPLANTS [J].
BROELSCH, CE ;
EMOND, JC ;
WHITINGTON, PF ;
THISTLETHWAITE, JR ;
BAKER, AL ;
LICHTOR, JL .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1990, 212 (03) :368-377
[5]  
BUCKEL E, 1993, TRANSPLANT P, V25, P1558
[6]   EXPERIENCE WITH LIVER AND KIDNEY ALLOGRAFTS FROM NON-HEART-BEATING DONORS [J].
CASAVILLA, A ;
RAMIREZ, C ;
SHAPIRO, R ;
NGHIEM, D ;
MIRACLE, K ;
BRONSTHER, O ;
RANDHAWA, P ;
BROZNICK, B ;
FUNG, JJ ;
STARZL, T .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1995, 59 (02) :197-203
[7]   THE PREDICTIVE VALUE OF DONOR LIVER BIOPSIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIMARY NONFUNCTION AFTER ORTHOTOPIC LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION [J].
DALESSANDRO, AM ;
KALAYOGLU, M ;
SOLLINGER, HW ;
HOFFMANN, RM ;
REED, A ;
KNECHTLE, SJ ;
PIRSCH, JD ;
HAFEZ, GR ;
LORENTZEN, D ;
BELZER, FO .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1991, 51 (01) :157-163
[8]  
HALLER GW, 1995, TRANSPLANT P, V27, P1192
[9]  
MARINO IR, 1995, TRANSPLANT P, V27, P1184
[10]   THE USE OF MARGINAL DONORS FOR LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION - A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY OF 365 LIVER-DONORS [J].
MOR, E ;
KLINTMALM, GB ;
GONWA, TA ;
SOLOMON, H ;
HOLMAN, MJ ;
GIBBS, JF ;
WATEMBERG, I ;
GOLDSTEIN, RM ;
HUSBERG, BS .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1992, 53 (02) :383-386