Levertransplantaties bij kinderen in Nederland ; Liver transplantation in paediatric patients in the Netherlands; evolution over the past two decades
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of the national paediatric liver transplantation programme in the University Medical Centre (UMC) Groningen in the Netherlands during the past two decades. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHOD: We analysed data from paediatric patients who underwent liver transplantation at UMC Groningen in the period 1995-2016. We compared outcomes from children who had undergone a liver transplantation in the period 1995-2005 (cohort A; n = 126) and in the period 2006-2016 (cohort B; n = 169). We performed a subanalysis in cohort B between liver transplantations with... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Artikel |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2017 |
Reihe/Periodikum: | Werner , M J M , de Kleine , R H J , Bodewes , F A J A , de Boer , M T , de Jong , K P , de Meijer , V E , Scheenstra , R , Sieders , E , Verkade , H J J & Porte , R J 2017 , ' Levertransplantaties bij kinderen in Nederland ' , Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde , vol. 161 , no. D2136 . < https://www.ntvg.nl/artikelen/levertransplantaties-bij-kinderen-nederland > |
Schlagwörter: | English Abstract / Journal Article |
Sprache: | Niederländisch |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29192889 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://hdl.handle.net/11370/fa40b997-3560-4528-b98e-092825703b7a |
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of the national paediatric liver transplantation programme in the University Medical Centre (UMC) Groningen in the Netherlands during the past two decades. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHOD: We analysed data from paediatric patients who underwent liver transplantation at UMC Groningen in the period 1995-2016. We compared outcomes from children who had undergone a liver transplantation in the period 1995-2005 (cohort A; n = 126) and in the period 2006-2016 (cohort B; n = 169). We performed a subanalysis in cohort B between liver transplantations with deceased donor livers (n = 132) and living donor liver transplantations (LDLT; n = 37). RESULTS: In cohort A, almost all livers came from deceased donors (99%), whereas in cohort B, 37 LDLTs (22%) were performed. The median age of recipients was significantly higher in cohort A (4.4 vs. 2.5 years; p = 0.015). Postoperative complications were comparable for both cohorts. Re-transplantations within a year after transplantation were more often performed in cohort A than in cohort B (25% vs. 12%; p = 0.004). Following LDLT, there was 2 times (5.4%) an indication for re-transplantation. In cohort B the 5-year survival rate was better than in cohort A (83 vs. 71%; p = 0.014). In cohort B, 5-year survival was higher after LDLT than after transplantation with a deceased donor liver (95 vs. 81%; p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Outcomes after paediatric liver transplantation in the Netherlands have further improved during the past two decades. With an actuarial 5-year survival of 83% in the most recent cohort, and as high as 95% following LDLT, we can say that the UMC Groningen has a successful national paediatric liver transplant programme.