Image_1_Survival and Complication of Liver Transplantation in Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.TIF
Background: Modern surgical techniques and scientific advancements have made liver transplant (LT) in infants feasible. However, there are only a small number of studies examining the short- as well as long-term outcomes of LT in this vulnerable subset of children.
Methods: Comprehensive searches were done systematically through the PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar databases. Studies that were retrospective record based or adopted a cohort approach and reported either patient survival rates or graft survival rates or complications of LT in infants were included in the meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 13.0.
Results: A total of 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled patient survival rate at 1 year, >1–5 years, and >5 years post-transplantation was 85% (95% CI: 78-−92%), 71% (95% CI: 59–83%), and 80% (95% CI: 69–91%), respectively. The overall pooled graft survival rate at 1 year, >1–5 years, and >5 years post-transplantation was 72% (95% CI: 68–76%), 62% (95% CI: 46–78%), and 71% (95% CI: 56–86%), respectively. The overall pooled rate for vascular complications, need for re-transplantation, biliary complications, and infection/sepsis was 12% (95% CI: 10–15%), 16% (95% CI: 12–20%), 15% (95% CI: 9–21%), and 50% (95% CI: 38–61%), respectively.
Conclusion: The current meta-analysis showed modest patient and graft survival rates for infant liver transplantation. However, the complication rates related to infection/sepsis were high. More comprehensive evidence is required from studies with larger sample sizes and a longer duration of follow-up.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.5754/hge12956
- https://doi.org//10.3748/wjg.v20.i32.11062
- https://doi.org//10.1093/ndt/gfm649
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1399-3046.2004.00292.x
- https://doi.org//10.4254/wjh.v7.i11.1509
- https://doi.org//10.1053/j.gastro.2008.02.029
- https://doi.org//10.1055/s-0029-1192052
- https://doi.org//10.4103/0366-6999.226901
- https://doi.org//10.3748/wjg.15.648
- https://doi.org//10.1097/TP.0b013e3181c5cdc1
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.09.021
- https://doi.org//10.1053/jpsu.2002.30242
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0022-3476(87)80545-0
- https://doi.org//10.1111/ajt.16236
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0022-3476(05)80531-1
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MPG.0b013e318175d7d2
- https://doi.org//10.1097/01.tp.0000128189.54868.18
- https://doi.org//10.1002/lt.24743
- https://doi.org//10.1111/petr.12756
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1399-3046.2007.00737.x
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1399-3046.2011.01549.x
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1399-3046.2006.00610.x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.12.307
- https://doi.org//10.1016/0022-3468(93)90516-n
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00000658-199606000-00004
- https://doi.org//10.1097/00007890-199707270-00011
- https://doi.org//10.1067/msy.1999.98686
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0022-3468(97)90612-6
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0022-3468(98)90353-0
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0022-3468(99)90653-x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/s0272-6386(00)70348-9
- https://doi.org//10.1002/lt.24677
- https://doi.org//10.2165/11316180-000000000-00000
- https://doi.org//10.1136/adc.87.2.93