The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Clinical experience gained from the use of 120 steatotic donor livers for orthotopic liver transplantation
Abstract
Steatosis of the donor liver is known to impact on patient and allograft outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of increasing grades of cadaveric donor liver steatosis on recipient outcome. Between January, 1986 and December, 2000, 120 OLTs were performed with 72 mild, 25 moderate, and 23 severe steatotic donor livers. Donors of steatotic livers were more likely to be older (P = .001) and have died of intracerebral haemorrhage than donors of nonsteatotic livers. Initial poor graft function (IPF) was more common in donor livers with either moderate or severe steatosis than in donor livers with mild steatosis (P = .03). Primary graft nonfunction (PNF) occurred in only 1 donor liver with severe steatosis. PGE1 (PGE1) usage was higher in recipients of donor livers with moderate or severe steatosis versus donor livers with mild steatosis (P = .001). Allograft loss was greater at 1 year both in the moderate and severe (P = .03) steatotic liver groups. Patient survival at 3 months and overall allograft survival both were impacted negatively by increasing grades of donor liver steatosis (P = .02, P = .03). Three-month allograft survival was reduced in the steatotic donor livers if the donor was 50+ years old (P = .033). Recipient status at OLT (P = .001) and donor steatosis (P = .046) impacted on 30 day allograft survival (multivariate analysis). In conclusion, increasing grades of donor liver steatosis were associated with worse IPF and increased PGE1 usage. There was a negative impact of steatosis on both recipient and early allograft survival.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Liver transplantation
(2016) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2015.10.006 · Cited by 1,082
Global challenges in liver disease
Williams, R. (2006) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.21347 · Cited by 788
The Biopsied Donor Liver: Incorporating Macrosteatosis Into High-Risk Donor Assessment
Spitzer, A. L., Lao, O. B., Dick, A. A. S., Bakthavatsalam, R., Halldorson, J. B., Yeh, M. M., Upton, M. P., Reyes, J. D., & Perkins, J. D. (2010) · Liver Transplantation · doi:10.1002/lt.22085 · Cited by 342
Liver transplantation using fatty livers: Always feasible?
McCormack, L., Dutkowski, P., El-Badry, A. M., & Clavien, P.-A. (2011) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2010.11.004 · Cited by 281
Kim, D.-S., Yoon, Y.-I., Kim, B. K., Choudhury, A., Kulkarni, A., Park, J. Y., Kim, J., Sinn, D. H., Joo, D. J., Choi, Y., et al. (2024) · Hepatology International · doi:10.1007/s12072-023-10629-3 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Verran, D., Kusyk, T., Painter, D., Fisher, J., Koorey, D., Strasser, S., Stewart, G., & McCaughan, G.
- Venue
- Liver Transplantation
- Published
- 2003-05
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 500-505
- ISSN
- 1527-6465 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2044003103
- Cited by
- 259
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical experience gained from the use of 120 steatotic donor livers for orthotopic liver transplantation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/jlts.2003.50099
- The paper
- Verran, D., Kusyk, T., Painter, D., Fisher, J., Koorey, D., Strasser, S., Stewart, G., & McCaughan, G. (2003). Clinical experience gained from the use of 120 steatotic donor livers for orthotopic liver transplantation. Liver Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1053/jlts.2003.50099
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.