FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1986586987> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1986586987 endingPage "772" @default.
• W1986586987 startingPage "765" @default.
• W1986586987 abstract "Background A right liver graft used almost routinely for adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), is associated with a higher incidence of morbidity and mortality in the donor. We compared volume regeneration and graft function between left and right liver grafts to examine the feasibility of using left liver grafts. Methods The left liver was considered acceptable as a graft when it was estimated to be over 40% of the recipient standard liver volume. Otherwise, right liver harvesting was used, provided the estimated right liver volume was less than 70% of the donor’s standard liver volume. Graft volume on computed tomography and the results of liver function tests 1, 3, and 12 months after LDLT were compared between recipients with left (n = 76) and right (n = 83) grafts. Possible factors influencing graft regeneration were evaluated by multivariate analysis. Results A higher regeneration rate in the left liver graft group resulted in the same ratio of graft to standard liver volume as in the right liver graft group (88% vs 87%) 1 year after LDLT. Liver function tests and 5-year survival rates were comparable between the 2 groups. An episode of acute rejection was a predictive factor for impaired graft regeneration 1 month after LDLT. The initial ratio of graft volume to standard liver volume was an independent factor for regeneration 1 year after LDLT. Conclusions A properly evaluated left liver graft can be used as safely as a right liver graft in adult-to-adult LDLT. The findings of the present study justify LDLT with a left liver graft under specific selection criteria and may be preferred to a right liver graft. A right liver graft used almost routinely for adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), is associated with a higher incidence of morbidity and mortality in the donor. We compared volume regeneration and graft function between left and right liver grafts to examine the feasibility of using left liver grafts. The left liver was considered acceptable as a graft when it was estimated to be over 40% of the recipient standard liver volume. Otherwise, right liver harvesting was used, provided the estimated right liver volume was less than 70% of the donor’s standard liver volume. Graft volume on computed tomography and the results of liver function tests 1, 3, and 12 months after LDLT were compared between recipients with left (n = 76) and right (n = 83) grafts. Possible factors influencing graft regeneration were evaluated by multivariate analysis. A higher regeneration rate in the left liver graft group resulted in the same ratio of graft to standard liver volume as in the right liver graft group (88% vs 87%) 1 year after LDLT. Liver function tests and 5-year survival rates were comparable between the 2 groups. An episode of acute rejection was a predictive factor for impaired graft regeneration 1 month after LDLT. The initial ratio of graft volume to standard liver volume was an independent factor for regeneration 1 year after LDLT. A properly evaluated left liver graft can be used as safely as a right liver graft in adult-to-adult LDLT. The findings of the present study justify LDLT with a left liver graft under specific selection criteria and may be preferred to a right liver graft." @default.
• W1986586987 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5012898538 @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5016954071 @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5028862176 @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5031651165 @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5065397000 @default.
• W1986586987 creator A5075550157 @default.
• W1986586987 date "2006-06-01" @default.
• W1986586987 modified "2023-10-02" @default.
• W1986586987 title "Regeneration and function of hemiliver graft: right versus left" @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1585295869 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1968139968 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1968701349 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1970968589 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1979205136 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1980677618 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W1989551510 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2002323806 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2006046921 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2007775319 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2015266638 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2018661524 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2020534111 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2027523476 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2032387985 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2032496032 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2037747845 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2038447460 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2040429547 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2040780112 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2043823924 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2046180313 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2047466936 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2049543934 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2054517325 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2056987962 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2057164764 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2057409127 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2059812421 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2068262018 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2075024431 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2079969931 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2081589114 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2088870556 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2106087915 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2106356058 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2106577013 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2110355154 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2113297297 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2116055436 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2117774293 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2120197716 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2122526190 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2132237710 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2132504508 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2133049684 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2140119007 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2164356667 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2167684403 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2170051603 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2171690732 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W2242880371 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W4211173486 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W4234244829 @default.
• W1986586987 cites W78633279 @default.
• W1986586987 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.12.011" @default.
• W1986586987 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16782431" @default.
• W1986586987 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W1986586987 type Work @default.
• W1986586987 sameAs 1986586987 @default.
• W1986586987 citedByCount "28" @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872014 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872015 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872016 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872017 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872019 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872020 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872021 @default.
• W1986586987 countsByYear W19865869872022 @default.
• W1986586987 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5012898538 @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5016954071 @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5028862176 @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5031651165 @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5065397000 @default.
• W1986586987 hasAuthorship W1986586987A5075550157 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C159110652 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C171056886 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C2776795407 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C2776909242 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C2779609443 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C2911091166 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C2992208098 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C512861765 @default.
• W1986586987 hasConcept C71924100 @default.

• next