Cargando…

Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis

AIM: To investigate the interactions between the graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GWRWR) and other risk factors responsible for inferior allograft outcomes. METHODS: A total of 362 patients who received liver transplantation (LT) were enrolled. Indicators such as graft/recipient weight and other pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Zhengtao, Lyu, Jingting, Li, Xiang, Yu, Lu, Que, Shuping, Xu, Jun, Geng, Lei, Zheng, Shusen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36733681
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1075845
_version_ 1784880272028729344
author Liu, Zhengtao
Lyu, Jingting
Li, Xiang
Yu, Lu
Que, Shuping
Xu, Jun
Geng, Lei
Zheng, Shusen
author_facet Liu, Zhengtao
Lyu, Jingting
Li, Xiang
Yu, Lu
Que, Shuping
Xu, Jun
Geng, Lei
Zheng, Shusen
author_sort Liu, Zhengtao
collection PubMed
description AIM: To investigate the interactions between the graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GWRWR) and other risk factors responsible for inferior allograft outcomes. METHODS: A total of 362 patients who received liver transplantation (LT) were enrolled. Indicators such as graft/recipient weight and other prognostic factors were collected. Comparisons of indicators and survival analysis were performed in groups categorized by the GWRWR. Interactions of large-for-size grafts (LFSGs) with graft macrosteatosis (MaS) were evaluated in terms of relative excess risk caused by interaction (RERI) and attributable proportion (AP). Cytoscape visualized the role of LFSGs in the risk profile for poor prognosis. RESULTS: Based on the GWRWR, LT cases can be categorized into three subgroups, standard (1%–2.5%), optimal (2.5%–3.0%), and inferior prognosis (>3.0%). Survival analysis confirmed clear separations in cases categorized by the above-defined limits on the GWRWR (P < 0.05). LFSGs caused inferior prognosis by initiating positive interactions with MaS severity. CONCLUSION: The GWRWR exerted nonlinear effects on prognosis in deceased donor LT cases. LFSGs (GWRWR > 3.0%) caused inferior outcomes, while grafts sized within (2.5%–3.0%) had optimal post-transplant prognosis. MaS increased the risk of poor prognosis by exerting positive synergistic effects on LFSGs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9887135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98871352023-02-01 Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis Liu, Zhengtao Lyu, Jingting Li, Xiang Yu, Lu Que, Shuping Xu, Jun Geng, Lei Zheng, Shusen Front Surg Surgery AIM: To investigate the interactions between the graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GWRWR) and other risk factors responsible for inferior allograft outcomes. METHODS: A total of 362 patients who received liver transplantation (LT) were enrolled. Indicators such as graft/recipient weight and other prognostic factors were collected. Comparisons of indicators and survival analysis were performed in groups categorized by the GWRWR. Interactions of large-for-size grafts (LFSGs) with graft macrosteatosis (MaS) were evaluated in terms of relative excess risk caused by interaction (RERI) and attributable proportion (AP). Cytoscape visualized the role of LFSGs in the risk profile for poor prognosis. RESULTS: Based on the GWRWR, LT cases can be categorized into three subgroups, standard (1%–2.5%), optimal (2.5%–3.0%), and inferior prognosis (>3.0%). Survival analysis confirmed clear separations in cases categorized by the above-defined limits on the GWRWR (P < 0.05). LFSGs caused inferior prognosis by initiating positive interactions with MaS severity. CONCLUSION: The GWRWR exerted nonlinear effects on prognosis in deceased donor LT cases. LFSGs (GWRWR > 3.0%) caused inferior outcomes, while grafts sized within (2.5%–3.0%) had optimal post-transplant prognosis. MaS increased the risk of poor prognosis by exerting positive synergistic effects on LFSGs. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9887135/ /pubmed/36733681 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1075845 Text en © 2023 Liu, Lyu, Li, Yu, Que, Xu, Geng and Zheng. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Liu, Zhengtao
Lyu, Jingting
Li, Xiang
Yu, Lu
Que, Shuping
Xu, Jun
Geng, Lei
Zheng, Shusen
Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title_full Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title_fullStr Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title_full_unstemmed Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title_short Graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
title_sort graft-to-recipient weight ratio exerts nonlinear effects on prognosis by interacting with donor liver macrosteatosis
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36733681
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1075845
work_keys_str_mv AT liuzhengtao grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT lyujingting grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT lixiang grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT yulu grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT queshuping grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT xujun grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT genglei grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis
AT zhengshusen grafttorecipientweightratioexertsnonlineareffectsonprognosisbyinteractingwithdonorlivermacrosteatosis