Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 368

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Functional Analysis of Grafts from Living Donors: Implications for the Treatment of Older Recipients

Open access
Emond, Jean C., Renz, John F., Ferrell, Linda D., Rosenthal, Philip, Lim, Robert C., Roberts, John P., Lake, John R., Ascher, Nancy L.·1996·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Living-related liver transplantation (LRLT) has established efficacy in children. In a larger recipient, LRLT requires the use of a small graft because of limits on the donor hepatectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The minimum graft weight required for successful transplantation has not been well established, although a characteristic pattern of graft dysfunction has been observed in our patients who receive small grafts. The authors present a clinicopathologic study of small liver grafts obtained from living donors. METHODS: Clinical and histologic data were reviewed for 25 patients receiving LRLT. In five older recipients (small group), the graft represented 50% or less of expected liver weight, whereas in 20 others (large group), the graft represented at least 60% of expected liver weight. A retrospective analysis of graft function was conducted by analyzing clinical parameters and histology. RESULTS: In the small group, 2 of 5 grafts (40%) were lost due to poor function, leading to one patient death (20% mortality), whereas in the large group, 2 of 20 grafts (10%) were lost due to arterial thrombosis without patient mortality. Early ischemic damage related to transplant was comparable with aspartate aminotransferase 203 +/- 23 (small group) and 290 +/- 120 (large group) at 24 hours (p = not significant). Early function was significantly decreased in the small group, with prothrombin time 18.2 +/- 2.2 seconds versus 14.8 +/- 1.6 seconds (large group) on day 3 (p = 0.034). All small group patients developed cholestasis with significantly increased total bilirubin levels at day 7 (16 +/- 5.2 mg% vs. 3.7 +/- 2.7 mg%; p = 0.021) and day 14 (12.0 +/- 7.4 vs. 1.8 +/- 0.7; p = 0.021) compared with the large group. Protocol biopsies in the small group revealed a diffuse ischemic pattern with cellular ballooning on day 7, which progressed to cholestasis in subsequent biopsies. Large group biopsies showed minimal ischemic changes. Three small group patients recovered with normal liver function by 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical recovery after a small-for-size transplant is characterized by significant functional impairment associated with paradoxical histologic changes typical of ischemia. These changes apparently are due to graft injury, which can only be the result of small graft size. These findings have significant implications for the extension of LRLT to adults.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000658-199610000-00012

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.

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

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

See all 368

Metadata

Authors
Emond, J. C., Renz, J. F., Ferrell, L. D., Rosenthal, P., Lim, R. C., Roberts, J. P., Lake, J. R., & Ascher, N. L.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
1996-10
Volume
224
Issue
4
Pages
544-554
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077119584
Cited by
368
References
0
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Functional Analysis of Grafts from Living Donors: Implications for the Treatment of Older Recipients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000658-199610000-00012
The paper
Emond, J. C., Renz, J. F., Ferrell, L. D., Rosenthal, P., Lim, R. C., Roberts, J. P., Lake, J. R., & Ascher, N. L. (1996). Functional Analysis of Grafts from Living Donors: Implications for the Treatment of Older Recipients. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199610000-00012

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.