Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report
By P. Clavien, M. Lesurtel, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, G. Gores, B. Langer, A. Perrier. The Lancet Oncology, 2011
956 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2–4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.
Subfields: Hepatology, Surgery
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c4490fd8e1acb8e6720872d7ff2bc7855328a4b0
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Hepatology
- J. Llovet
- Jordi Bruix1 , 2
- Riccardo Lencioni
- V. Mazzaferro
- Alejandro Forner1 , 2
- Andrew X. Zhu
- Peter R. Galle
- T. de Baère
In Surgery
Citations in the corpus
- EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. (2018, background): “The risks and benefits of LDLT should be accurately evaluated in both donor and recipient, a concept known as double equipoise.(399,461) Although there are no reasons to maintain substantial differences in donor source for HCC recipients, selection criteria for”
- EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Liver transplantation. (2016, background): “Clinical data suggesting a potential benefit rely on uncontrolled pilot and retrospective analyses [83,425,426].”
- EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. (2012, background): “As a consequence of their success, the Milan criteria have been integrated in the BCLC staging system [148,149] and in the UNOS pre-transplant staging for organ allocation in the US [218], and remain the benchmark for any other prognostic criteria proposed for expanding the indication to liver trans”
- EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. (2012, background): “As a consequence of their success, the Milan criteria have been integrated in the BCLC staging system [148,149] and in the UNOS pre-transplant staging for organ allocation in the US [218], and remain the benchmark for any other prognostic criteria proposed for expanding the indication to liver trans”