A212 LIVER TRANSPLANTATION FOR PRIMARY SCLEROSING CHOLANGITIS (PSC): EXPERIENCE FROM THE LAST THREE DECADES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In liver transplantation (LT) for PSC, pre-transplant colectomy may lower the risk of PSC recurrence (rPSC), and well-controlled or lack of IBD may protect against rPSC, however, these findings are not consistent across all studies. It is unknown whether recipient/donor sex plays a role in rPSC. Aims To study factors associated with PSC recurrence in the post-transplant population. Methods This is a retrospective study on adults who received an LT for PSC in Halifax NS from 1985 to 2020. Graft and patient outcomes are analyzed by logistic regression models. Results A total of 92 patients underwent deceased donor LT for PSC with a mean follow-up time of 9.2 yrs (SD 7.1). Fifty-three remain active in the program, 2 were lost to follow up and 37 died. The mean age at transplant was 43 (SD13, range 18.9–67.8). Seven patients had a second transplant. The five- and 10-year patient survival rate of the entire cohort was 78.7% and 66% respectively. In the active cohort, the prevalence of rPSC was 23.5% (12/51). Retransplantation for rPSC occurred in 8.3% (1/12). The prevalence of IBD was 82.4% (42/51), consisted of ulcerative pancolitis (64.7%, 33/51), ulcerative proctitis (3.9%), left-sided UC (2%) and Crohn’s disease (9.8%). Males are much more likely than females to undergo a colectomy at any time (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.07–28.22, p 0.041). Refractory IBD was the predominant indication for a colectomy (10/16), followed by dysplasia or colon cancer (6/16). In the post-transplant period, 69% had stable IBD without therapy escalation, 11.9% were escalated to a biologic, 19% underwent a colectomy for active IBD symptoms. Pre-transplant colectomy negatively predicted rPSC, in this subgroup 0% (0/6) developed rPSC. Neither recipient sex (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.26–5.0, p 0.86) or recipient age predicted the likelihood of rPSC. There was no association between donor sex on rPSC (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.30–5.27, p 0.76). A trend towards increased rPSC was observed in male donors to female recipients versus female-to-female transplants (OR 6, 95% CI 0.33–107.42, p 0.224). Overall, having a post-transplant colectomy, subtotal or total, irrespective of timing, did not significantly impact rPSC (OR 0.389, 95% CI 0.09–1.66, p 0.20). Diagnosis of IBD was not associated with an increased risk of rPSC (OR 1.21, p 0.83). Conclusions Several factors were associated with rPSC after liver transplant in patients with PSC and IBD, pre-transplant colectomy was found to be protective, male donor to female recipient was a potential risk factor. It is important to study these factors in multi-centered cohorts to understand the pathogenesis of PSC. Pre-transplant total colectomy may be beneficial for several reasons, reducing rPSC, controlling IBD activities, and lowering dysplasia and colon cancer rates in the post-transplant population. Funding Agencies None
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".