Salvage Liver Transplant Versus Primary Liver Transplant for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Dipesh Kumar Yadav,Wei Chen,Xueli Bai,Alina Singh,Guogang Li,Tao Ma,Xiazhen Yu,Zhi Xiao,Bingfeng Huang,Tingbo Liang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12659/aot.908623
2018-01-01
Abstract:The strategy of salvage liver transplantation (SLT) originated for initially resectable and transplantable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to preclude upfront transplantation, with SLT in the case of recurrence. However, SLT remains a controversial approach in comparison to primary liver transplant (PLT). The aim of our study was to conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the short-term outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) between SLT and PLT for patients with HCC, stratifying results according to the Milan criteria and donor types. A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies comparing SLT and PLT. A fixed effects model and a random effects model meta-analysis were conducted to assess the short-term outcomes, OS, and DFS based on the evaluation of heterogeneity. SLT had superior 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS and DFS compared with that of PLT. After classifying data according to donor type and Milan criteria, our meta-analysis revealed: that for deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients, there were no significant differences in 1-year and 3-year OS rate between the SLT group and the PLT group. However, the 5-year OS rate was superior in the SLT group compared to the PLT group. Similarly, SLT had superior 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rate compared to PLT in living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) recipients. Moreover, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year DFS were also superior in SLT compared to PLT in both the DDLT and LDLT recipients. In patients within Milan criteria there were no statistically significant differences in 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS and DFS between the SLT group and the PLT group. Similarly, in patients beyond Milan criteria, both SLT and PLT showed no significant difference for 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rate. Our meta-analysis included the largest number of studies comparing SLT and PLT, and SLT was found to have significantly better OS and DFS. Moreover, this meta-analysis suggests that SLT has comparable postoperative complications to that of PLT, and thus, SLT may be a better treatment strategy for recurrent HCC patients and patients with compensated liver, whenever feasible, considering the severe organ limitation and the safety of SLT. However, PLT can be referred as a treatment strategy for HCC patients with cirrhotic and decompensated liver.