Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Gastroenterol. May 28, 2023; 29(20): 3066-3083
Published online May 28, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i20.3066
Published online May 28, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i20.3066
Ref. | Study design | Groups (n) | Control group | NRP protocol and viability criteria | Definition of ITBL | Follow up | ITBL in intervention (DCD NRP) | ITBL in control (DCD) | ITBL in control (DBD) |
Schurink et al[42], 2022 | Cohort | NRP1 (20) vs DCD (49) vs DBD (81) | DCD/DBD | Dutch protocol2 | Symptomatic radiologically NAS without the presence of a HAT | Median-NRP 23 mo, DCD25 mo and DBD 26 mo | 1/15 (7%); 1/5 (20%)3 | 8/30 (26%) | 6/78 (7%) |
Mohkam et al[45], 2022 | Cohort | NRP (157) vs NMP (34) | DCD | France protocol4 | NAS that were unrelated to any hepatic artery complications | Median-NRP 22 mo; NMP 24 mo | 2/68 (2.9%)5 | 3/34 (8.8%)5 | NA |
Gaurav et al[44], 2022 | Cohort | NRP (69) vs NMP (67) vs SCS (97) | DCD | United Kingdom protocol6 | Presence of any biliary stricture, dilatation, or irregularity of the intra- or extrahepatic bile ducts and/or cast on MRCP away from the biliary anastomosis in the presence of patent arterial vasculature | Median-54 mo (SCS), 28 mo (NRP) and 24 mo (NMP) | 0/69 (0%)7 | 7/67 (11%)7 NMP and 12/97 (14%)7 SCS | NA |
Hessheimer et al[34], 2022 | Cohort | NRP (545) vs SRR (258) | DCD | Spain protocol8 | Patient with patent hepatic artery, signs or symptoms of cholestasis, and direct or indirect cholangiographic imaging reflecting strictures of the intra- and/or extrahepatic biliary tree proximal to the transplant anastomosis | Median–31 mo | 6/545 (1%) | 24/258 (9%) | NA |
Ruiz et al[40], 2021 | Cohort | NRP (100) vs DBD (200) | DBD | Spain protocol8 | Non-anastomotic biliary stricture in the presence of a patent hepatic artery and confirmed based on cholangiographic evidence (T-tube cholangiogram or magnetic resonance) | Mean-36 mo | 0/100 (0%) | NA | 0/200 (0%) |
Muñoz et al[36], 2020 | Cohort | NRP (23) vs SRR (22) | DCD | Spain protocol8 | NR | Mean-33.9 mo (SRR) and 14.2 mo (NRP) | 0/23 (0%) | 3/22 (13.6%) | NA |
Savier et al[31], 2020 | Cohort | NRP (50) vs DBD (100) | DBD | France protocol4 | Presence of any disseminated biliary stricture on magnetic resonance and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, regardless of the presence or absence of arterial thrombosis or stenosis | Mean-34.8 mo (cDCD NRP) and 51.7 mo (DBD) | 1/50 (2%) | NA | 1/100 (1%) |
Miñambres et al[35], 2020 | Cohort | NRP (16) vs DBD (29) | DBD | Spain protocol8 | NR | Median-6 mo (cDCD) and 16 mo (DBD) | 0/16 (0%) | NA | 0/29 (0%) |
De carlis et al[43], 2021 | Cohort | DCD NRP + D-HOPE (37) vs DCD SRR SCS (37) | DCD | Italy protocol9 | Cholangiographic evidence of diffuse intrahepatic, hilar, or extrahepatic biliary strictures in the presence of a patent hepatic artery. Isolated anastomotic strictures were excluded from IC | Median-17 mo (NRP + D-HOPE) and all transplants were followed at least 1 yr | 1/37 (3%) | 3/37 (8%) | NA |
Muller et al[37], 2020 | Cohort | NRP (132) vs HOPE (93) | DCD | France protocol4 | NAS was defined as either multifocal, unifocal intrahepatic, or hilar strictures with or without the presence of concomitant HAT or arterial complications. NAS was detected clinically and confirmed by magnetic resonance cholangiography | Median-20 mo (NRP) and 28 mo (HOPE) | 2/32 (6.3%)5 | 4/32 (12.5%)5 | NA |
Hessheimer et al[41], 2019 | Cohort | NRP (95) vs SRR (117) | DCD | Spain protocol8 | Cholestasis and confirmed based on cholangiographic evidence (typically coming from magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography) of diffuse non-anastomotic biliary strictures, with or without prestenotic dilatations, in the presence of a patent hepatic artery | Median-20 mo | 2/95 (2%) | 15/117 (13%) | NA |
Rodríguez-Sanjuán et al[39], 2019 | Cohort | NRP (11) vs DBD (51) | DBD | Spain protocol8 | Diffuse stenosis of the intrahepatic biliary tree–suspected by jaundice, cholangitis, abnormal biochemical liver test, or abnormal findings on ultrasound or T-tube cholangiography- provided there is no hepatic artery thrombosis | Ranges between 7-27 mo. Minimum follow-up of 3 mo | 2/11 (13.3%) | NA | 13/51 (27.7%) |
Watson et al[33], 2019 | Cohort | NRP (43) vs SRR (187) | DCD | United Kingdom protocol6 | Presence of any non-anastomotic biliary stricture on ERCP or MRCP in the absence of arterial thrombosis or stenosis | Up to 5 yr of follow-up | 0/42 (0%) | 47/171 (27%) | NA |
De Carlis et al[38], 2018 | Cohort | NRP (20) vs DBD ECMO SCS (17) vs DBD non-ECMO SCS (52) | DBD-ECMO DBD-non-ECMO | Italy protocol9 | Strictures, irregularities, or dilatations of the intrahepatic bile duct. Isolated anastomotic biliary strictures were not included in the definition of IC. The diagnosis of IC was confirmed with at least 1 adequate imaging study of the biliary tree, and concomitant hepatic artery thrombosis was excluded by Doppler ultrasound or computed tomography | Median-14 mo (cDCD), 20 mo (DBD-ECMO) and 17 mo (DBD-non-ECMO) | 2/20 (10%) | NA | DBD-ECMO 0/17 0%; DBD-non-ECMO 2/52 (4%) |
- Citation: Durán M, Calleja R, Hann A, Clarke G, Ciria R, Nutu A, Sanabria-Mateos R, Ayllón MD, López-Cillero P, Mergental H, Briceño J, Perera MTPR. Machine perfusion and the prevention of ischemic type biliary lesions following liver transplant: What is the evidence? World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29(20): 3066-3083
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v29/i20/3066.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v29.i20.3066