Salvage liver transplantation in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

AIM: To evaluate survival and recurrence after salvage liver transplantation (SLT) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with primary liver transplantation (PLT) using a meta-analysis. METHODS: Literature on SLT versus PLT for the treatment of HCC published between 1966 and Ju...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inWorld journal of gastroenterology : WJG Vol. 18; no. 19; pp. 2415 - 2422
Main Authors Li, Hong-Yu, Wei, Yong-Gang, Yan, Lv-Nan, Li, Bo
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited 21.05.2012
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:AIM: To evaluate survival and recurrence after salvage liver transplantation (SLT) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with primary liver transplantation (PLT) using a meta-analysis. METHODS: Literature on SLT versus PLT for the treatment of HCC published between 1966 and July 2011 was retrieved. A metaanalysis was conducted to esti- mate pooled survival and disease-free rates. A fixed or random-effect model was established to collect the data. RESULTS: The differences in overall survival and disease-free survival rates at 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival rates were not statistically significant between SLT group and PLT group (P 〉 0.05). After stratifying the various studies by donor source and Milan criteria, we found that: (1) Living donor liver transplantation recipients had significantly higher 1-year survival rate, lower 3-year and 5-year survival rates compared with deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients. And in DDLT recipients they had better 1-year and 5-year disease-free survival rate in SLT group; and (2) No difference was seen in 1-year, 3-year and 5-yearsurvival rates between two groups who beyond Milan criteria at the time of liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: SLT can be effectively performed for patients with recurrence or deterioration of liver function after hepatectomy for HCC. It does not increase the perioperative mortality and has a similar long-term survival rates compared to PLT.
Bibliography:14-1219/R
AIM: To evaluate survival and recurrence after salvage liver transplantation (SLT) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with primary liver transplantation (PLT) using a meta-analysis. METHODS: Literature on SLT versus PLT for the treatment of HCC published between 1966 and July 2011 was retrieved. A metaanalysis was conducted to esti- mate pooled survival and disease-free rates. A fixed or random-effect model was established to collect the data. RESULTS: The differences in overall survival and disease-free survival rates at 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival rates were not statistically significant between SLT group and PLT group (P 〉 0.05). After stratifying the various studies by donor source and Milan criteria, we found that: (1) Living donor liver transplantation recipients had significantly higher 1-year survival rate, lower 3-year and 5-year survival rates compared with deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients. And in DDLT recipients they had better 1-year and 5-year disease-free survival rate in SLT group; and (2) No difference was seen in 1-year, 3-year and 5-yearsurvival rates between two groups who beyond Milan criteria at the time of liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: SLT can be effectively performed for patients with recurrence or deterioration of liver function after hepatectomy for HCC. It does not increase the perioperative mortality and has a similar long-term survival rates compared to PLT.
Salvage liver transplantation; Primary livertransplantation; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Meta-analy-sis; Survival rate
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
Correspondence to: Bo Li, PhD, MD, Department of Liver and Vascular Surgery, Center of Liver Transplantation, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China. doclibo@126.com
Author contributions: Li HY designed the research, collected data and wrote the manuscript; Wei YG and Li B designed the research and contributed to the discussion; Yan LN contributed to the discussion.
Telephone: +86-28-85422476 Fax: +86-28-85423724
ISSN:1007-9327
2219-2840
DOI:10.3748/wjg.v18.i19.2415