↓ Skip to main content

Living Donor Hepatectomy: Is it Safe?

Overview of attention for article published in The American Surgeon, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Living Donor Hepatectomy: Is it Safe?
Published in
The American Surgeon, October 2015
DOI 10.1177/000313481508101038
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is high risk to a healthy donor and remains controversial. Living donor nephrectomy (LDN), conversely, is a common practice. The objective is to examine the outcomes of LDH and compare this risk profile to LDN. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for hepatectomies and nephrectomies from 1998 to 2011. LDH or LDN were identified by donor ICD-9 codes. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality and complications. Bivariate analysis compared nondonor hepatectomy or nondonor nephrectomy (NDN). Multivariate analyses adjusted for baseline organ disease, malignancy, or benign lesions. There were 430 LDH and 9211 nondonor hepatectomy. In-hospital mortality was 0 and 6 per cent, respectively (P < 0.001); complications 4 and 33 per cent (P < 0.001). LDH had fewer complications [odds ratio (OR) 0.15 (0.08-0.26)]. There were 15,631 LDN and 117,966 NDN. Mortality rates were 0.8 per cent LDN and 1.8 per cent NDN (P < 0.001). Complications were 1 and 21 per cent (P < 0.001). LDN had fewer complications [OR 0.06 (0.05-0.08)] and better survival [OR 0.32 (0.18-0.58)]. Complication rates were higher in LDH than LDN (4% vs 1%, P < 0.001), but survival was similar (0% vs 0.8% mortality, P = 0.06). In conclusion, morbidity and mortality rates of LDH are significantly lower than hepatectomy for other disease. This study suggests that the risk profile of LDH is comparable with the widely accepted LDN.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 27%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Librarian 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 53%
Chemical Engineering 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The American Surgeon
#1,559
of 1,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,784
of 286,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Surgeon
#13
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,933 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.