Liver transplantation in patients with a history of migration-A German single center comparative analysis

PLoS One. 2019 Oct 22;14(10):e0224116. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224116. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Liver transplant (LT) programs in Germany increasingly face a multiethnic patient population. To date no outcome data for LT in patients with a history of migration is available for Germany. This complicates decision-making before wait-listing such patients. We conducted a single-center cohort analysis of all primary LT between April 2007 and December 2015, stratified for the history of migration to investigate differences in the outcome. We found transplant rates resembling the proportion of persons with a history of migration in the general public in the region of our center. Differences were found concerning age at LT and prevalence of underlying diseases. Re-Transplant rates, Kaplan-Meier Estimates for overall survival, also after stratification for viral hepatitis, sex, ethnicity or presence of a language-barrier showed no statistical differences. The multivariate analysis showed no migration-related covariate associated with a negative outcome. These results stand in contrast to most of the previous evidence from North America and the UK and need to be taken into consideration during the wait-listing process of patients with a history of migration in need of a LT in centers in the Eurotransplant region.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Emigrants and Immigrants / statistics & numerical data*
  • End Stage Liver Disease / epidemiology
  • End Stage Liver Disease / mortality*
  • End Stage Liver Disease / therapy
  • Female
  • Germany / epidemiology
  • Humans
  • Liver Transplantation / mortality*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Prognosis
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Survival Rate
  • Waiting Lists / mortality*

Grants and funding

This work was funded by the Friedrich Baur research fund which was awarded to JNB (award-number 30/16). This intra-institutional funding for junior scientists was solely used to pay the institution’s ethic committee processing fees. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.