Safety and efficacy of liver transplantation for methylmalonic acidemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Transplantation Reviews, ISSN: 0955-470X, Vol: 35, Issue: 1, Page: 100592
2021
- 16Citations
- 43Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting 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.
Metrics Details
- Citations16
- Citation Indexes16
- 16
- Captures43
- Readers43
- 43
Review Description
Background-objectives: Liver transplantation (LT) and combined liver and kidney transplantation (CLKT) have been proposed as enzyme replacement therapies for methylmalonic aciduria (MMA). We aimed to synthesize the available evidence on their safety and efficacy. Methods: Medline, Embase and Cochrane library were searched to identify studies that reported post-LT/CLKT clinical outcomes of MMA from their inception to February 1, 2020. The pooled rate was calculated using random-effects model with Freeman–Tukey double arcsine transformation method. Results: Thirty-two studies involving 109 patients were included. The pooled estimate rates were 99.9% (95% CI 95.3–100.0) for patient survival, 98.5% (95% CI 91.5–100.0) for graft survival after LT/CLKT. The combined incidence of biliary, vascular complications and rejection were 0.2% (95% CI 0.0–6.6), 7.7% (95% CI 0.1–22.1) and 18.4% (95% CI 4.6–36.3), respectively. The pooled estimate rates were 100.0% (95% CI 99.4–100.0) for metabolic eradication, 61.5% (95% CI: 33.4–87.0) for normalization of kidney function. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) remission is more promising after CLKT (70.3% VS 37.6% in LT group). The pooled estimate rates for neurodevelopmental status improvement and protein intake liberalization were 52.0% (95% CI 2.8–98.8) and 36.3% (95% CI 6.3–71.7), respectively. Conclusions: This first quantitative systematic review confirms favorable survival outcomes and partially improved disease-related complications in transplanted MMA patients, although some results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies with detailed description of long-term outcomes and consensus on neurodevelopmental evaluation method can help provide a more accurate picture.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955470X20300653; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trre.2020.100592; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85098988020&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33422927; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0955470X20300653; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trre.2020.100592
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know