Cited by 298Liver Diseases and ImmunityOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes

A re-evaluation of the risk factors for the recurrence of primary sclerosing cholangitis in liver allografts

Open access
Alabraba, Edward, Nightingale, Peter, Gunson, Bridget, Hubscher, Stefan, Olliff, Simon, Mirza, Darius, Neuberger, James·2009·Liver Transplantation

Abstract

Previously, we have found that the absence of the colon after liver transplantation (LT) protects the patient from recurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis (rPSC). As our previous observation has not been confirmed in other series, we have reviewed our cohort of patients grafted for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) with greater numbers and longer follow-up to reassess the rate, consequences, and risk factors for rPSC. We collected data on patients who underwent LT for PSC between January 1986 and April 2006. Data were collected for cytomegalovirus status, inflammatory bowel disease status, time of colectomy, type of colectomy, donor-recipient gender mismatch, recipient sex, extended donor criteria (EDC), and donor risk index. Accepted criteria were used to diagnose rPSC. Of a total of 230 consecutive adult patients, 61 (27%) underwent colectomy pre-/peri-LT, and 54 (23.5%) developed rPSC at a median of 4.6 (range, 0.5–12.9) years post-LT. A total of 263 deceased donor grafts were used, and 73 were EDC grafts. A diagnosis of rPSC was made in 61 of the 263 grafts (23%). The recurrence-free patient survival was significantly better (P < 0.05) in patients who underwent pre-/peri-LT colectomy and in those with non-EDC grafts. In conclusion, in this larger cohort of 230 patients and with longer follow-up of 82.5 (range, 0.0–238.6) months [in comparison with the previous report of 152 recipients with a follow-up of 52.8 (range, 1–146) months], we have shown that colectomy remains a significant risk factor for rPSC and that colectomy before and during initial LT for PSC confers a protective effect against rPSC in subsequent graft(s). Moreover, we have shown that EDC grafts are also a significant risk factor for rPSC.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/lt.21679

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Segundo DS, Ruiz JC, Izquierdo M, Fernandez-Fresnedo G, Gomez-Alamillo C, Merino R, et al. Calcineurin inhibi- tors, but not rapamycin, reduce percentages of CD4ϩCD25ϩFOXP3ϩ regulatory T cells in renal trans- plant recipients. Transplantation 2006;82:550-557.
  2. ALABRABA ET AL. LIVER TRANSPLANTATION.DOI 10.1002/lt. Published on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 15276473, 2009, 3, Downloaded from https://aasldpubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lt.21679, Wiley Online Library on [01/09/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alabraba, E., Nightingale, P., Gunson, B., Hubscher, S., Olliff, S., Mirza, D., & Neuberger, J.
Affiliations
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Neuberger, James
Venue
Liver Transplantation
Published
2009-03
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
330-340
ISSN
1527-6465 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066392072
Cited by
298
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 12
FWCI
10.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Liver Transplantation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Diseases and Immunity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Keywords
primary sclerosing cholangitis, recurrence, colectomy, risk factors, extended criteria donors, donor risk index, donor-recipient sex mismatch, cytomegalovirus, inflammatory bowel disease, graft survival
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Cadaver, Colectomy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Graft Rejection, Graft Survival, HLA Antigens, Humans, Immunosuppressive Agents, Male, Middle Aged, Recurrence, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Sex Characteristics, Tissue Donors, Transplantation, Homologous, Cholangitis, Sclerosing, Survival Analysis, Liver Transplantation, Survivors, Patient Selection, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review