Results of liver transplantation in diabetic recipients

Kynan C. Trail, Robert J. Stratta, Jennifer L. Larsen, Elizabeth I. Ruby, Kashinath D. Patil, Alan N. Langnas, Jeremiah P. Donovan, Michael F. Sorrell, Rowen K. Zetterman, Todd J. Pillen, Byers W. Shaw

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

62 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background. The results of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are not well defined. Methods. Between 1985 and 1991, 45 adult patients with pretransplantation DM (5 type I, 40 type II) underwent OLTx at our center as identified by retrospective chart review. We compared this diabetic recipient group to a case-control nondiabetic group matched for age, gender, primary liver disease, weight, and timing of OLTx. A total of 30 variables were collected and analyzed with McNemar's test for categorical data, paired t tests for continuous data, and survival and repeated measures analysis for longitudinal data. Results. No differences between diabetic and nondiabetic recipients were noted in patient or graft survival, the incidence or severity of rejection, blood transfusions, operative complications, readmissions, major infections, or number of hospital days after OLTx. However, the incidence of minor bacterial (p = 0.046) and minor fungal (p = 0.035) infections were higher in the DM group. Serum blood urea nitrogen (p = 0.02) and creatinine (p = 0.03) levels were also higher in patients with diabetes versus control patients during the first year after OLTx. Conclusions. In carefully selected patients with pretransplantation DM, OLTx can be accomplished with results similar to nondiabetic recipients in spite of a higher incidence of minor infections and renal dysfunction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)650-658
Number of pages9
JournalSurgery
Volume114
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 1993

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Results of liver transplantation in diabetic recipients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this