|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | Hepatic hemodynamic changes during liver transplantation: A review显示文摘Liver transplantation is performed in the recent decades with great improvements not only technically but also conceptually. However, there is still lack of consensus about the optimal hemodynamic characteristics during liver transplantation. The representative hemodynamic parameters include portal vein pressure, portal vein flow, and hepatic venous pressure gradient; however, there are still others potential valuable parameters, such as total liver inflow and hepatic artery flow. All the parameters are correlated closely and some internal modulating mechanisms, like hepatic arterial buffer response, occur to maintain stable hepatic inflow. To distinguish the unique importance of each hepatic and systemic parameter in different states during liver transplantation, we reviewed the published data and also conducted two transplant cases with different surgical strategies applied to achieve ideal portal inflow and pressure. | An-Chieh Feng Hsiu-Lung Fan Teng-Wei Chen Chung-Bao Hsieh | 2014 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2014，20，32： | 6 |
| 2 | 肝移植术中入肝血流量对术后早期移植物功能不全的临床意义显示文摘目的探讨肝移植术中入肝血流量对术后早期移植物功能不全(EAD)发生的临床意义。方法回顾性分析2006年1月至2016年10月我科室治疗的138例肝移植受体的临床资料。根据EAD的诊断标准分为2组:发生EAD组(EAD组)和未发生EAD组(非EAD组)。比较2组患者入肝血流量与各高危因素的关系,并采用logistic多因素分析确定术后发生EAD的危险因素。结果与非EAD组比较,EAD组术中门静脉最大血流量差异具有统计学意义(P <0.05)。经logistic多因素分析发现,术中门静脉最大血流量<1 600 mL/min是术后EAD的独立危险因素。结论肝移植术中门静脉最大血流量<1 600 mL/min是术后EAD的独立危险因素,检测肝移植术中入肝血流量可为术后是否发生EAD提供参考。 | 郭瑞 李晓航 李峰 刘青鹏 逯宪良 王博文 孟一曼 杨蕾 张佳林 | 2019 | 中国医科大学学报2019，48，3： | 6 |
| 3 | Outcomes of right-lobe and left-lobe living-donor liver transplantations using small-for-size grafts显示文摘AIM To analyze the outcomes of living-donor liver transplantation(LDLT) using left-lobe(LL) or right-lobe(RL) small-for-size(SFS) grafts.METHODS Prospectively collected data of adult patients who underwent LDLT at our hospital in the period from January 2003 to December 2013 were reviewed. The patients were divided into the RL-LDLT group and the LL-LDLT group. The two groups were compared in terms of short-and long-term outcomes, including incidence of postoperative complication, graft function, graft survival, and patient survival. A SFS graft was defined as a graft with a ratio of graft weight(GW) to recipient standard liver volume(RSLV)(GW/RSLV) of < 50%. The Urata formula was used to estimate RSLV.RESULTS Totally 218 patients were included for analysis, with 199 patients in the RL-LDLT group and 19 patients in the LL-LDLT group. The two groups were similar in terms of age(median, 53 years in the RL-LDLT group and 52 years in the LL-LDLT group, P = 0.997) but had significantly different ratios of men to women(165:34 in the RL-LDLT group and 8:11 in the LL-LDLT group, P < 0.0001). The two groups were also significantly different in GW(P < 0.0001), GW/RSLV(P < 0.0001), and graft cold ischemic time(P = 0.007). When it comes to postoperative complication, the groups were comparable(P = 0.105). Five patients died in hospital,4(2%) in the RL-LDLT group and 1(5.3%) in the LLLDLT group(P = 0.918). There were 38 graft losses, 33(16.6%) in the RL-LDLT group and 5(26.3%) in the LL-LDLT group(P = 0.452). The 5-year graft survival rate was significantly better in the RL-LDLT group(95.2% vs 89.5%, P = 0.049). The two groups had similar 5-year patient survival rates(RL-LDLT: 86.8%, LL-LDLT: 89.5%, P = 0.476).CONCLUSION The use of SFS graft in LDLT requires careful tailormade surgical planning and meticulous operation. LLLDLT can be a good alternative to RL-LDLT with similar recipient outcomes but a lower donor risk. Further research into different patient conditions is needed in order to validate the use of LL graft. | Wong Hoi She Kenneth SH Chok James YY Fung Albert CY Chan Chung Mau Lo | 2017 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2017，23，23： | 4 |
| 4 | 2016年活体肝移植受体指南——专家解读显示文摘目前,活体肝移植(living donor liver transplantation,LDLT)在世界范围内越来越多地被人们所接受,成为解决供体肝脏短缺的重要策略。然而,与尸体肝移植(deceased donor liver transplantation,DDLT)相比,LDLT受到伦理学、内科学及外科技术等多方面的挑战,而其中许多问题尚未解决。本文介绍了国际肝脏移植协会(International Liver Transplantation Society,ILTS)2016年发表的活体肝移植指南。 | 李江 潘澄 | 2017 | 实用器官移植电子杂志2017，5，4： | 3 |
| 5 | 器官移植患者围手术期序贯性皮肤干预效果的相关性显示文摘目的对器官移植患者围手术期序贯性皮肤干预,降低器官移植患者围手术期皮肤压力性损伤的发生率。方法选取昆明市第一人民医院2018年4月至2019年10月接受器官移植患者100例,随机分为对照组、治疗组,每组50例。对照组选用传统的围手术期皮肤照护标准,治疗组实施围手术期序贯性皮肤干预,比较两组患者的围手术期压力性损伤发生率。观察术前(Barand评分、血清总蛋白);手术期(Waterlow评分、手术时间、手术类型、术中体温);术后(血清总蛋白、术后下床活动时间、术后第一次活动时间)对发生压力性损伤的相关性。结果对照组压力性损伤发生率为22.0%(11/50);治疗组压力性损伤发生率为6.0%(3/50),明显低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Braden评分、Waterlow评分、手术类型、手术时长(h)是器官移植患者发生压力性损伤的影响因素,相关性具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论影响器官移植患者围手术期皮肤压力性损伤发生的危险因素较多,临床实施针对性的序贯性皮肤干预能够降低患者围手术期皮肤压力性损伤的发生率,为临床护士提供了照护标准,体现了专业护理能力及水平,提高护理质量。 | 蔡丽萍 向建文 王胤佳 李敏 徐丽萍 蒙旭 | 2020 | 昆明医科大学学报2020，41，5： | 1 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员