These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparative prospective study of two liver graft preservation solutions: University of Wisconsin and Celsior.
    Author: Lopez-Andujar R, Deusa S, Montalvá E, San Juan F, Moya A, Pareja E, DeJuan M, Berenguer M, Prieto M, Mir J.
    Journal: Liver Transpl; 2009 Dec; 15(12):1709-17. PubMed ID: 19938119.
    Abstract:
    University of Wisconsin solution (UWS) is the gold standard for graft preservation. Celsior solution (CS) is a new solution not as yet widely used in liver grafts. The aim of this study was to compare the liver function of transplanted grafts stored in these 2 preservation solutions. The primary endpoints were the rates of primary nonfunction (PNF) and primary dysfunction (PDF). We performed a prospective and pseudorandomized study that included 196 patients (representing 104 and 92 livers preserved in UWS and CS, respectively) at La Fe University Hospital (Valencia, Spain) between March 2003 and May 2005. PNF and PDF rates, liver function laboratory parameters, postoperative bleeding, vascular and biliary complications, and patient and graft survival at 3 years were compared for the 2 groups. The 2 groups were similar in terms of donor variables, recipient variables, and surgical techniques. The PNF rates were 2.2% and 1.9% in the CS and UWS groups, respectively (P = not significant), and the PDF rates were 15.2% and 15.5% in the CS and UWS groups, respectively (P = not significant). There were no significant differences in the laboratory parameters for the 2 groups, except for alanine aminotransferase levels in month 3, which were lower in the CS group (P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in terms of complications. Three-year patient and graft survival rates were as follows for years 1, 2, and 3: 83%, 80%, and 76% (patient) and 80%, 77%, and 73% (graft) for the UWS group and 83%, 77%, and 70% (patient) and 81%, 73%, and 67% (graft) for the CS group (P = not significant). In conclusion, this study shows that CS is as effective as UWS in liver preservation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]