Objectives: Scarcity of liver grafts has led to the use of marginal donors, consequently increasing the number of complications posttransplant. To prevent this situation, several indicators have been developed. However, important differences remain among countries. Here, we compared an early-risk liver transplant indicator based on the Spanish Liver Transplant Registry, called the Graft Risk Index, versus the US donor risk index and the Eurotransplant donor risk index. Materials and Methods: The new indicator was based on prospectively collected data from 600 adult liver transplants performed in our center. We considered 2 events to compare the indexes: graft survival and rejection-free graft survival, with Cox proportional regression for analyses. Power to predict graft survival was evaluated by calculating the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve. Results: We found no differences between the US and Eurotransplant donor risk indexes in prediction of patients with and without early graft failure. With regard to early survival, only the Graft Risk Index allowed better survival discrimination, in which survival progressively decreased with values ≥ 3 (with probability of graft survival at 1 month of 68%; 95% confidence interval, 46.2-82.5). This increase in risk was significant compared with the standard group (hazard ratio of 10.15; 95% confidence interval, C 3.91-26.32; P < .001). We calculated powers of prediction of 0.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.62), 0.54 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.65), and 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.77) for donor risk index, Eurotransplant donor risk index, and early Graft Risk Index, respectively. Conclusions: Neither the US donor risk index nor the Eurotransplant donor risk index was valid for our Spanish liver donation and transplant program. Therefore, an indicator to predict posttransplant graft survival that is adapted to our environment is necessary. This national Graft Risk Index can be a useful tool to optimize donor-recipient matching.
Introducción
En el contexto de la pandemia mundial por COVID-19, las distintas manifestaciones clínicas de esta infección suponen un reto para los profesionales sanitarios. La afectación respiratoria, síntoma principal de la infección por SARS-CoV-2, hace que otras manifestaciones, como las neurológicas, pasen a un segundo plano, con el consecuente retraso en el diagnóstico y tratamiento.
Material y métodos
Todo paciente COVID-19 que ha ingresado con sintomatología neurológica o diagnosticado de encefalitis desde marzo de 2020 en un hospital de tercer nivel en Zaragoza, España.
Resultados
Dos pacientes con infección COVID-19 confirmada por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa (PCR) nasofaríngea y cuyo cuadro clínico consistía en alteraciones neurológicas compatibles con encefalitis. La microbiología del líquido cefalorraquídeo (LCR) fue negativa para bacterias y virus, incluido el SARS-CoV-2 pero, ante la sospecha clínica de encefalitis por este último, se instauró tratamiento antiviral, con inmunoglobulinas y plasmaféresis de forma precoz. A pesar de ello la evolución no fue satisfactoria.
Conclusiones
La encefalitis por COVID-19 es una entidad clínica descrita recientemente, cuya fisiopatología aún se desconoce y no se dispone, hasta la fecha, de un tratamiento con evidencia clínica.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.