Reply: Methodological issues in a meta‐analysis
Kristian Thorlund, Tahany Awad – 25 June 2010
Escape hepatitis B virus mutations in recipients of antibody to hepatitis B core antigen–positive liver grafts receiving hepatitis B immunoglobulins
Bruno Roche, Anne‐Marie Roque‐Afonso, Mylene Sebagh, Valerie Delvart, Jean Charles Duclos‐Vallee, Denis Castaing, Didier Samuel – 25 June 2010 – A variety of prophylactic strategies are used to prevent the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission from antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti‐HBc)–positive donors. The mechanisms underlying the failure of HBV immunoglobulin monoprophylaxis have been poorly evaluated. Seventy‐seven anti‐HBc–positive grafts were used in 21 hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)–positive recipients and 56 HBsAg‐negative recipients.
Small‐for‐size graft: Not defined solely by being small for size
Tetsuya Kiuchi, Yasuharu Onishi, Taro Nakamura – 25 June 2010
The biopsied donor liver: Incorporating macrosteatosis into high‐risk donor assessment
Austin L. Spitzer, Oliver B. Lao, André A. S. Dick, Ramasamy Bakthavatsalam, Jeffrey B. Halldorson, Matthew M. Yeh, Melissa P. Upton, Jorge D. Reyes, James D. Perkins – 25 June 2010 – To expand the donor liver pool, ways are sought to better define the limits of marginally transplantable organs. The Donor Risk Index (DRI) lists 7 donor characteristics, together with cold ischemia time and location of the donor, as risk factors for graft failure. We hypothesized that donor hepatic steatosis is an additional independent risk factor.
Reply: Liver grafts from donors with central nervous system tumors: A single‐center perspective
David Schiff – 25 June 2010
Increased incidence of early de novo cancer in liver graft recipients treated with cyclosporine: An association with C2 monitoring and recipient age
Angela S. W. Tjon, Jerome Sint Nicolaas, Jaap Kwekkeboom, Robert A. de Man, Geert Kazemier, Hugo W. Tilanus, Bettina E. Hansen, Luc J. W. van der Laan, Thanyalak Tha‐In, Herold J. Metselaar – 25 June 2010 – The goal of this study was to determine the risk factors for de novo cancer after liver transplantation (LTx). Retrospective analyses were performed in 385 LTx patients who underwent transplantation between 1986 and 2007. In total, 50 (13.0%) recipients developed de novo malignancy.
Immunosuppression, cancer, and the long‐term outcomes after liver transplantation: Can we do better?
James M. Abraham, Julie A. Thompson – 25 June 2010
Safety of small‐for‐size grafts in adult‐to‐adult living donor liver transplantation using the right lobe
Ju Ik Moon, Choon Hyuck David Kwon, Jae‐Won Joh, Gum O. Jung, Gyu‐Seong Choi, Jae Berm Park, Jong Man Kim, Milljae Shin, Sung‐Joo Kim, Suk‐Koo Lee – 25 June 2010 – The problem of graft size is one of the critical factors limiting the expansion of adult‐to‐adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We compared the outcome of LDLT recipients who received grafts with a graft‐to‐recipient weight ratio (GRWR) < 0.8% or a GRWR ≥ 0.8%, and we analyzed the risk factors affecting graft survival after small‐for‐size grafts (SFSGs) were used.