DCD for liver transplantation
Marginal Donors: Current and Future Status, Vol: 9784431544845, Page: 103-122
2014
- 1Citations
- 7Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Book Chapter Description
A critical shortage of donor liver grafts has promoted the creation of strategies to increase the donor pool. The Institute of Medicine and the Health Resources and Services Administration statement encourages using grafts from higher risk donors in order to decrease the growing waiting list [1-3]. In March 1995, an international workshop on non-heart-beating donation was held in Maastricht. Potential donors after cardiac death (DCDs) are classified using the Maastricht classification [4]. Categories 1, 2, and 4 include uncontrolled DCDs, and Category 3 includes controlled DCDs. DCDs have come to represent the fastest growing proportion of the donor pool, thus increasing from approximately 1 % of all deceased donors in 1996 to 11 % of deceased donors in 2008. In some United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions with limited standard criteria for donors, DCDs comprise up to 16-21 % of the total donor pool [5]. Recent data regarding kidney transplants show no differences between the long-term outcomes of kidney grafts from DCDs and those from brain-dead donors (DBDs), although the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) is higher in DCD kidneys [6-8]. Following the successful use of DCD kidney grafts for transplantation, interest has moved toward using extrarenal organs such as the liver, pancreas, and lungs [9]. Recently, a number of transplant programs have begun to use livers from DCDs. Although the use of extrarenal DCD grafts is increasing, this endeavor is still in the midst of development. In the early phase, liver transplantations from DCDs do not always show favorable post-transplant results compared to liver transplantations from DBDs. Livers from DCDs have been found to display diffuse hepatocyte necrosis, increased platelet adhesion, an absence of bile flow, and depletion of ATP. The incidence of DGF in the kidneys is high; however, it can be treated with hemodialysis until the kidneys recover. In contrast, DGF in the liver often requires retransplantation as rescue therapy. For this reason, there has been great caution in using DCD liver grafts. However, in recent years, the incidences of primary nonfunction (PNF) and severe DGF have been remarkably reduced due to the use of selected controlled DCD livers, better selection criteria, and shorter warm and cold ischemic times. Regarding preservation, the introduction of UW solution has improved the quality of cold preserved organ preservation, even for livers. However, the major principle of hypothermic liver preservation is the reduction of metabolic activity. Recently, the Barcelona group has begun to resuscitate uncontrolled DCD donors with the use of normothermic extracorporeal machine perfusion (NECMO) [10]. The use of warm perfusion may provide full metabolic support to DCD livers and establish whether a graft is viable. Again, development for clinical use of DCD liver graft is still midst. Multiple strategies will be required (Table 10.1).
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84930719689&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54484-5_10; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-4-431-54484-5_10; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54484-5_10; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-4-431-54484-5_10
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know