AIM: Elderly donors are half of the grafts available in our center for liver transplantation. We retrospectively investigated their characteristics, outcomes, and variables related to graft failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 1996 to 2003, 540 (46.4%) of 1163 donors were older than 60 years of age and 236 grafts (43.4%) were transplanted, whereas the others were refused. The clinical investigated variables were examined among this cohort. RESULTS: The median age of donors increased from 37 to 62 years. Donors older than 60 years of age were more often refused than younger ones (66% vs 44%); HCV-positive (9.9% vs 5.4%); HbcAb-positive (18.6% vs 12.6%), and steatotic (35.7% vs 13.9%; P < .01). Among donors older than 60 years, the main parameter to refuse the graft was the grade of steatosis. The variables related to the graft loss from donors older than 60 years were as follows: model for end stage liver disease (MELD) recipient >15 (65% vs 39%), cold ischemia time >10 hours (25% vs 13%), high blood losses (3987 +/- 4764 vs 2664 +/- 2043 mL), and year of liver transplantation after 2000 (26% vs 46%; P < .01). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates were significantly lower among donors older than 60 years than other donors: 75%, 65%, and 62% versus 85%, 83%, and 78%, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Donors older than 60 years of age provided liver transplants to half of our recipients. The graft survival rate of these organs was lower than that of younger donors and to improve it the other risk variables for poor outcome should be reduced, including MELD score of the recipient and prolonged cold ischemia time.

Using Elderly Donors in Liver Transplantation.

GRAZI, GIAN LUCA;RAVAIOLI, MATTEO;ZANELLO, MATTEO;ERCOLANI, GIORGIO;CESCON, MATTEO;VAROTTI, GIOVANNI;DEL GAUDIO, MASSIMO;VETRONE, GAETANO;PINNA, ANTONIO DANIELE
2005

Abstract

AIM: Elderly donors are half of the grafts available in our center for liver transplantation. We retrospectively investigated their characteristics, outcomes, and variables related to graft failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 1996 to 2003, 540 (46.4%) of 1163 donors were older than 60 years of age and 236 grafts (43.4%) were transplanted, whereas the others were refused. The clinical investigated variables were examined among this cohort. RESULTS: The median age of donors increased from 37 to 62 years. Donors older than 60 years of age were more often refused than younger ones (66% vs 44%); HCV-positive (9.9% vs 5.4%); HbcAb-positive (18.6% vs 12.6%), and steatotic (35.7% vs 13.9%; P < .01). Among donors older than 60 years, the main parameter to refuse the graft was the grade of steatosis. The variables related to the graft loss from donors older than 60 years were as follows: model for end stage liver disease (MELD) recipient >15 (65% vs 39%), cold ischemia time >10 hours (25% vs 13%), high blood losses (3987 +/- 4764 vs 2664 +/- 2043 mL), and year of liver transplantation after 2000 (26% vs 46%; P < .01). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates were significantly lower among donors older than 60 years than other donors: 75%, 65%, and 62% versus 85%, 83%, and 78%, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Donors older than 60 years of age provided liver transplants to half of our recipients. The graft survival rate of these organs was lower than that of younger donors and to improve it the other risk variables for poor outcome should be reduced, including MELD score of the recipient and prolonged cold ischemia time.
Grazi G.L.; Ravaioli M.; Zanello M.; Ercolani G.; Cescon M.; Varotti G.; Del Gaudio M.; Vetrone G.; Lauro A.; Ramacciato G.; Pinna A.D.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/13201
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 15
social impact