Next Article in Journal
A Comparison of Dietary Protein Digestibility, Based on DIAAS Scoring, in Vegetarian and Non-Vegetarian Athletes
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessment of Malnutrition, Sarcopenia and Frailty in Patients with Cirrhosis: Which Tools Should We Use in Clinical Practice?
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Fibre-Enriched Orange Juice on Postprandial Glycaemic Response and Satiety in Healthy Individuals: An Acute, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Crossover Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Obesity in the Liver Transplant Setting
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Weight Gain and De Novo Metabolic Disorders after Liver Transplantation

1
Department of Translational and Precision medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy Viale dell’Università 37, 00185 Roma, Italy
2
Department of General Surgery “Paride Stefanini”, Liver Transplantation Unit, “Sapienza” University, 00185 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients 2019, 11(12), 3015; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11123015
Submission received: 11 November 2019 / Revised: 30 November 2019 / Accepted: 5 December 2019 / Published: 10 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition in Liver Cirrhosis and Liver Transplantation)

Abstract

:
The development of nutritional and metabolic abnormalities represents an important burden in patients after liver transplantation (LT). Our study aimed at evaluating the incidence, time of onset, and risk factors for nutritional and metabolic abnormalities in patients after LT. The study was a single-center retrospective study. Consecutive patients undergoing elective LT from 2000 to 2016 were enrolled. The presence of at least two among arterial hypertension (AH), diabetes mellitus (DM), dyslipidemia, and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 Kg/m2) was utilized to define patients with the metabolic disorder (MD). Three hundred and fifteen patients were enrolled; the median age was 56 years (68% males). Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) was the origin of liver disease in 10% of patients. During follow-up, 39% of patients developed AH, 18% DM, and 17% dyslipidemia. Metabolic disorders were observed in 32% of patients. The NASH etiology (OR: 6.2; CI 95% 0.5–3; p = 0.003) and a longer follow-up (OR: 1.2; CI 95% 0.004–0.02; p = 0.002) were associated with de novo MD. In conclusion, nutritional and metabolic disorders are a frequent complication after LT, being present in up to one-third of patients. The NASH etiology and a longer distance from LT are associated with de novo MD after LT.

1. Introduction

The development of nutritional and metabolic abnormalities represents an important burden in patients after liver transplantation (LT) [1]. Immunosuppressive therapy, sedentary lifestyle, increase in appetite, and changes in eating habits are all contributing factors.
After, LT patients may become overweight and even morbidly obese [1,2]. More recently, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is increasing as a cause of liver disease which may lead to liver cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease. Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis is the most rapidly rising indication for LT in the United States, and it is projected to become the most common indication in future years [3,4]. Patients with a diagnosis of NASH are frequently overweight or obese [5,6], and nutritional and metabolic disorders have been found to persist or rapidly recur after LT [7,8,9].
The chronic use of immunosuppressants, particularly corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors, may also contribute to worsen metabolic disorders and to weight gain [2]. Indeed, corticosteroids promote insulin resistance through downregulation of insulin production, upregulation of hepatic gluconeogenesis, and a decrease in glucose utilization in peripheral tissues [10,11]. Calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs), tacrolimus, and cyclosporine are known to increase vasoconstriction and cause sodium-dependent volume expansion leading to arterial hypertension [12]. Calcineurin inhibitors have also been associated with decreased insulin sensitivity and reduced insulin release [13]. Moreover, both CNIs and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors (sirolimus and everolimus) increase serum lipid levels, the latter affecting the levels more severely [14].
An increase in body weight, arterial hypertension, and serum glucose levels at 6 months have been reported as predictors of metabolic syndrome after LT [15]. Furthermore, metabolic disorders may also favor cardiovascular diseases, increasing cardiovascular mortality in the long term after LT [16].
In this setting, patients with metabolic disorder after LT constitute a high-risk group in which therapeutic interventions should be optimized [9,17].
Our study aimed at evaluating the incidence, time of onset, and risk factors for nutritional disorders and de novo metabolic abnormalities in patients after LT.

2. Materials and Methods

The study was a single-center retrospective study. The medical records of all patients undergoing elective LT at the University Hospital Policlinico Umberto I in Rome from 2000 to 2016 were reviewed. Exclusion criteria were age < 18 years, re-transplant, combined kidney–liver transplant, and a follow-up ≤ 3 months. All patients were followed from the date of transplantation until death, loss to follow-up or end of study (15 June 2019). Age, gender, body mass index, liver disease etiology, immunosuppressive treatment (at discharge and maintenance), and time of corticosteroid therapy were collected in each patient. Body mass index (BMI), diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM), arterial hypertension (AH), and dyslipidemia were derived from clinical records before LT and at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years after LT. Body weight before liver transplant was always corrected for water retention. Metabolic disorders were defined as de novo when they appeared after LT. The presence of at least two among AH, DM, dyslipidemia, and BMI ≥ 30 Kg/m2 during follow-up was arbitrarily utilized to define patients as those with metabolic disorder (MD).
All patients were followed at the outpatient clinic of the Transplant Centre of our University Hospital. The first-line standard immunosuppressive therapy was triple therapy with steroids, CNIs, and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF); steroids were generally continued for 3–6 months and MMF for 1 year. In the case of autoimmune etiology, the steroid therapy was maintained chronically at low doses; in the case of kidney dysfunction, MMF was continued or reintroduced together with CNIs to maintain the lowest dose of CNIs. Everolimus (EVR) was also alternatively utilized to discontinue CNIs completely in patients with kidney dysfunction.
Results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, median, and range or as percentage as indicated. For the comparison among groups, the Pearson chi square test or the Fischer exact test were used for categorical variables. For continuous variables, the Mann–Whitney test was applied. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify factors independently associated with the development of metabolic disorders after LT. Only variables with a p-value < 0.05 at univariate analysis were included.
The paired “t” test was utilized for the analysis of repeated variables. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Study Population

A total of 315 patients submitted to liver transplantation were enrolled in the study (Figure 1), the median age was 56 years (range 18–68), 68% were males, and the most frequent origin of LT was the hepatitis C virus, followed by alcohol abuse. Thirty-one patients (10%) were transplanted for NASH. Before LT, 18% of patients presented AH, 28% DM, and 12% dyslipidemia; a BMI ≥ 30 was present in 14% of patients. Seventeen percent of patients had at least two metabolic disorders. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients at transplant are shown in Table 1.

3.2. Weight Gain After LT

Figure 2 shows the trend of BMI after LT. Mean BMI was slightly but significantly decreased 1 year after LT (25.8 ± 4 versus 24.5 ± 5 Kg/m2, p = 0.03; basal versus 1 year, respectively). Later on, BMI tended to gradually increase and became significantly higher versus pre-transplant levels in the third year (24.5 ± 5 versus 26.2 ± 4 Kg/m2, p = 0.04 basal versus 3 years, respectively), reaching a plateau at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. Patients transplanted for NASH showed a different pattern: BMI was unchanged at 1 year in comparison to pre-LT condition (27 ± 3 versus 26.8 ± 4 Kg/m2; p = 0.6, basal versus 1 year, respectively), while it increased progressively at 3 (28.4 ± 5 Kg/m2, p = 0.05 versus basal) and 5 years (28.8 ± 4 Kg/m2, p = 0.05 versus basal) (Figure 2).

3.3. Metabolic Disorders After LT

During a median follow-up of 75.5 months (range 3–220 months), 122 patients (39%) developed de novo AH after LT. Fifty percent of de novo AH was diagnosed within the first year after LT. De novo DM was diagnosed in 57 patients (18%) during the follow-up. Fifty-nine percent of patients developed this diagnosis within the first year after LT. De novo dyslipidemia was diagnosed in 53 patients (17%), 39% of them developed this disorder within the first year after surgery (Figure 3).
At least two de novo metabolic disorders were reported in 32% of overall patients; of this, 42% were diagnosed during the first year, 67% within the third year after LT, and 82% within the 5th year. Patients transplanted for NASH showed the highest rate of de novo DM, HA, and MD (Table 2).

3.4. Risk Factors Associated with De Novo Metabolic Disorders

The univariate analysis identified NASH, time of follow-up after LT, a higher BMI before and at 1 year from LT as risk factors for de novo MD. The use of tacrolimus seemed to be protective for the development of MD (Table 3). The multivariate analysis selected NASH etiology (OR: 6.2; CI 95% 0.5–3; p = 0.003) and a longer FU (OR: 1.2; CI 95% 0.004–0.02; p = 0.002) as the only independent risk factors associated with the development of de novo MD.

4. Discussion

Metabolic disorders and weight gain are important burdens in patients after LT. These are due to the fact of multiple reasons such as a sedentary lifestyle, increased appetite, and modifications in eating habits [1]. The chronic use of immunosuppressants may also play a role in the development of these conditions [2].
Weight gain after liver transplantation is welcome in patients transplanted with severe nutritional depletion; however, a rapid weight gain might be harmful. In our population, mean BMI at the time of LT was only slightly above normal values; however, these patients were likely overhydrated during end-stage liver disease; therefore, BMI was possibly overestimated. The majority of our patients were therefore normal or undernourished at transplantation. Mean BMI, in our series, showed a trend to decrease the first year after surgery and tended to recover later on. This result is at variance with studies showing a rapid and severe weight gain after liver transplantation [9,18,19]. This difference might depend on a lower prevalence of patients with NASH origin in our study (only 10%). Indeed, in the previously cited studies, the percentage of patients transplanted for NASH was much greater. In the 31 NASH patients in our series, we observed that BMI progressively increased from the first year after surgery was significantly higher at 3 and 5 years. A higher percentage of patients transplanted for NASH is therefore likely to modify the pattern of weight changes after LT throughout a more frequent development of post-transplant obesity. In this regard, bariatric surgery has been proposed before or concomitant to LT in patients with morbid obesity [20].
In our study, we found a high rate of de novo metabolic disorders (AH, DM, dyslipidemia) after LT. Our finding is in keeping with what has been previously reported [1,19,21]; however, most of the former studies did not focus on de novo metabolic disorders as in the present investigation.
The majority of de novo disorders developed, in our study, in the first year after LT. In the subgroup of patients transplanted for NASH, de novo AH, DM, and MD occurred even at a higher rate.
It has been suggested that immunosuppressive strategies (the kind of immunosuppressant, the dosages, and the period length of steroid assumption) may play a role in the rate of development of de novo AH, DM, dyslipidemia, and MD, after LT [22]. In our study, we failed to find a correlation with MD and the different immunosuppressive regimens adopted. Tacrolimus appeared to have a protective role in the onset of de novo MD at univariate analysis but was not found to be an independent predictor at multivariate analysis. The retrospective nature of our study has certainly limited the possibility to follow all the dose modifications of the immunosuppressive therapy which is frequently tailored in the individual patients according to nephrotoxicity, rejection risk or clinical events.
The onset of de novo metabolic disorders after LT, not surprisingly, was associated with NASH as the origin of the previous liver disease and increased during the time. A longer distance from transplantation is likely to identify those patients with the longest time of exposure to immunosuppressants and those with older age. Previous studies reported a similar association among older age and obesity, AH, DM, and metabolic syndrome after LT [23,24,25].
Our study has some limitations, being a monocentric and retrospective study. The retrospective analysis of our database prevented the possibility to diagnose a metabolic syndrome according to the proposed cut-offs as HDL cholesterol and the abdominal circumference were not reported in the database. For this reason, we utilized the term “metabolic disorders” to represent the development of relevant metabolic disorders (at least two among AH, DM, dyslipidemia, and obesity) in our patients.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, de novo HA, DM, dyslipidemia, and obesity are frequent in liver transplant patients, mostly in those with NASH etiology. These latter patients also experience a progressive weight gain which contributes to metabolic disorders. Interventions to minimize the risk of developing weight gain and metabolic disorders after LT need to be planned. Giving particular care to those patients at higher risk.

Author Contributions

B.L. and D.D., study concept and design acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, manuscript preparation; D.P. and D.T., acquisition of data; M.M., study concept and design, analysis and interpretation of data; manuscript preparation; final drafting of the manuscript; G.M., S.G.C. and M.R., manuscript supervision.

Funding

This research was funded by the Universita’ degli Studi di Roma Sapienza prot. C26A10TCSL.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Iadevaia, M.; Giusto, M.; Giannelli, V.; Lai, Q.; Rossi, M.; Berloco, P.; Corradinia, G.; Merli, M. Metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk after liver transplantation: A single-center experience. Transpl. Proc. 2012, 44, 2005–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Duchini, A.; Brunson, M.E. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for recurrent nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in liver transplant recipients with morbid obesity. Transplantation 2001, 72, 156–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Wawrzynowicz-Syczewska, M.; Karpinska, E.; Jurczyk, K.; Laurans, L.; Boron-Kaczmarska, A. Risk factors and dynamics of weight gain in patients after liver transplantation. Ann. Transpl. 2009, 14, 45–50. [Google Scholar]
  4. Leonard, J.; Leonard, J.; Heimbach, J.K.; Malinchoc, M.; Watt, K.; Charlton, M. The impact of obesity on long-TERM outcomes in liver trans-plant recipients—Results of the NIDDK Liver Transplant Database. Am. J. Transp. 2008, 8, 667–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Wong, R.J.; Aguilar, M.; Cheung, R.; Perumpail, R.B.; Harrison, S.A.; Younossi, Z.M.; Ahmed, A. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the second leading etiology of liver disease among adults awaiting liver transplantation in the United States. Gastroenterology 2015, 148, 547–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Charlton, M.R.; Burns, J.M.; Pedersen, R.A.; Watt, K.D.; Heimbach, J.K.; Dierkhising, R.A. Frequency and out-comes of liver transplantation for nonalcoholic steato-hepatitis in the United States. Gastroenterology 2011, 141, 1249–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bhati, C.; Idowu, M.O.; Sanyal, A.J.; Rivera, M.; Driscoll, C.; Stravitz, R.T.; Kohli, D.R.; Matherly, S.; Puri, P.; Gilles, H.C.; et al. Long-term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation for Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis-Related Cirrhosis. Transplantation 2017, 101, 1867–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kappus, M.; Abdelmalek, M. De Novo and Recurrence of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis After Liver Transplantation. Clin. Liver Dis. 2017, 21, 321–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Anastácio, L.R.; Lima, A.S.; Toulson, D.C. Metabolic syndrome and its components after liver transplantation: Incidence, prevalence, risk factors, and implications. Clin Nutr. 2010, 29, 175–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Schacke, H.; Docke, W.D.; Asadullah, K. Mechanisms involved in the side effects of glucocorticoids. Pharmacol. Ther. 2002, 96, 23–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Watt, K.D. Metabolic syndrome: Is immunosuppression to blame? Liver Transpl. 2011, 17, 38–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Curtis, J.J. Hypertensinogenic mechanism of the calcineurin inhibitors. Curr. Hypertens. Rep. 2002, 4, 377–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Fernandez, L.A.; Lehmann, R.; Luzi, L.; Battezzati, A.; Angelico, M.C.; Ricordi, C. The effects of maintenance doses of FK506 versus cyclosporin A on glucose and lipid metabolism after orthotopic liver transplantation. Transplantation 1999, 68, 1532–1541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Zimmermann, A.; Zobeley, C.; Weber, M.M.; Lang, H.; Galle, P.R.; Zimmermann, T. Changes in lipid and carbohydrate metabolism under mTOR- and calcineurin-based immunosuppressive regimen in adult patients after liver transplantation. Eur. J. Intern. Med. 2016, 29, 104–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Perez, L.V.; Alvarez, J.M.; Gonzalez, A.P.; Delgado, J.B.; Rodero, G.C.; Rivas, E.F.; Barrera Baena, P.; De la Mata Garcia, M. Prevalence and Predictors of Metabolic Syndrome After Liver Transplantation. Transpl. Proc. 2016, 48, 2519–2524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Satapathy, S.K.; Charlton, M.R. Posttransplant metabolic syndrome: New evidence of an epidemic and recommendations for management. Liver Transpl. 2011, 17, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tan, H.L.; Lim, K.B.; Iyer, S.G.; Chang, S.K.; Madhavan, K.; Kow, A.W. Metabolic syndrome after a liver transplantation in an Asian population. HPB 2015, 17, 713–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Anastacio, L.R.; Ferreira, L.G.; Ribeiro, H.; Lima, A.S.; Garcia Vilela, E.; Correira, M.I. Body Composition and Overweight of Liver Transplant Recipients. Transplantation 2011, 92, 947–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Richards, J.; Gunson, B.; Johnson, J.; Neuberger, J. Weight gain and obesity after liver transplantation. Transpl. Int. 2005, 18, 461–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Diwan, T.S.; Rice, T.C.; Heimbach, J.K.; Schauer, D.P. Liver Transplantation and Bariatric Surgery: Timing and Outcomes. Liver Transpl. 2018, 24, 1280–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Bianchi, G.; Marchesini, C.; Mazzocchi, R.; Pinna, A.D.; Zoli, M. Metabolic syndrome in liver transplantation: Relation to etiology and immunosuppression. Liver Transpl. 2008, 14, 1648–1654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Sprinzl, M.F.; Weinmann, A.; Lohse, N.; Tönissen, H.; Koch, S.; Schattenberg, J.; Maria, H.L.; Tim, Z.; Peter, R.G.; Torsten, H.; et al. Metabolic syndrome and its association with fatty liver disease after orthotopic liver transplantation. Transpl. Int. 2013, 26, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Courivaud, C.; Kazory, A.; Simula-Faivre, D.; Chalopin, J.M.; Ducloux, D. Metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic events in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2007, 83, 1577–1581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Canzanello, V.J.; Textor, S.C.; Taler, S.J.; Schwartz, L.L.; Porayko, M.K.; Wiesner, R.H.; Krom, R.A. Late hypertension after liver transplantation: A comparison of cyclosporine and tacrolimus (FK 506). Liver Transpl. Surg. 1998, 4, 328–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Jindal, R.M.; Sidner, R.A.; Hughes, D.; Pescovitz, M.D.; Leapman, S.B.; Milgrom, M.L.; Lumeng, L.; Filo, R.S. Metabolic problems in recipients of liver transplants. Clin. Transpl. 1996, 10, 213–217. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Flowchart of the study.
Figure 1. Flowchart of the study.
Nutrients 11 03015 g001
Figure 2. BMI modifications in 315 subjects followed after liver transplantation. All patients (dotted line), patients with previous NASH (continue line), patients with no-NASH (dashed–dotted line). * <0.05 compared to BMI at LT.
Figure 2. BMI modifications in 315 subjects followed after liver transplantation. All patients (dotted line), patients with previous NASH (continue line), patients with no-NASH (dashed–dotted line). * <0.05 compared to BMI at LT.
Nutrients 11 03015 g002
Figure 3. Prevalence and time of onset of de novo metabolic disorders after LT.
Figure 3. Prevalence and time of onset of de novo metabolic disorders after LT.
Nutrients 11 03015 g003
Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the 315 patients at the time of liver transplantation (LT).
Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the 315 patients at the time of liver transplantation (LT).
VariablePatients (n = 315)
Age at LT (years)56 (18–68)
MELD score15 (6–40)
BMI (Kg/m2) *25.3 (17–38)
BMI ≥ 25, n (%) *138 (44%)
BMI ≥ 30, n (%) *44 (14%)
Male gender, n (%)209 (68%)
Etiology, n (%)
  HCV118 (37%)
  HBV54 (17%)
  NASH31 (10%)
  Alcohol67 (21%)
  Other45 (15%)
HCC, n (%)141 (45%)
AH pre-LT, n (%)58 (18%)
DM pre-LT, n (%)86 (28%)
Dyslipidemia pre-LT, n (%)33 (12%)
At least two metabolic disorders (MD), n (%)54 (17%)
Immunosuppressive treatment at discharge, n (%)
Triple therapy with TAC (steroids + MMF + TAC)259 (82%)
Triple therapy with EVR (steroids + MMF + EVR)7 (2%)
Dual therapy with TAC (steroids + TAC)45 (15%)
Other4 (1%)
Duration of steroids treatment (months)6.5 (0–125)
Follow-up (months)75.5 (3–220)
Continuous variables expressed as median (range). Abbreviations: LT—liver transplantation; HCC—hepatocellular carcinoma; BMI—body mass index; MELD—model for end-stage liver disease; HCV—hepatitis C virus; HBV—hepatitis B virus; NASH—non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; AH—arterial hypertension; DM—diabetes mellitus; MMF—mycophenolate mofetil; TAC—tacrolimus; EVR—everolimus. * BMI refers to body weight corrected for water retention.
Table 2. Incidence of metabolic disorders before and after liver transplantation in patients transplanted or not for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.
Table 2. Incidence of metabolic disorders before and after liver transplantation in patients transplanted or not for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.
VariableTransplanted for NASH
31 Patients
Transplanted for Other Etiology 294 Patientsp-Value
De novo DM10 (32%)47 (16%)0.03
De novo AH20 (64%)102 (34%)0.007
De novo Dyslipidemia7 (23%)46 (14%)0.5
De novo MD17 (55%)85 (28%)0.003
Pre-LT DM8 (26%)78 (26%)0.89
Pre-LT AH5 (16%)53 (18%)0.7
Pre-LT Dyslipidemia16 (51%)17 (6%)<0.0001
Pre-LT MD14 (45%)36 (12%)<0.0001
Abbreviations: NASH—non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; DM—diabetes mellitus; AH—arterial hypertension; LT—liver transplantation; MD—metabolic disorder. The statistically significant data are in bold.
Table 3. Univariate analysis for the development of metabolic disorder status after liver transplant.
Table 3. Univariate analysis for the development of metabolic disorder status after liver transplant.
VariableDe Novo MD 102Non-De Novo MD 213p-Value
Male gender, n (%)73 (72%)136 (64%)0.2
Age (years)54 ± 854 ± 110.9
Etiology NASH, n (%)26 (25%)5 (3%)<0.0001
BMI pre-LT (kg/m2)26.9 ± 325.6 ± 40.01
BMI 1 year after LT (kg/m2)26.4 ± 524 ± 40.02
MELD14 ± 516 ± 70.1
Immunosuppressive drugs at discharge
Steroids98 (96%)200 (94%)0.2
MMF87 (85%)176 (83%)0.6
AZA14 (14%)21 (10%)0.3
Tacrolimus77 (76%)191 (90%)0.01
Everolimus20 (2%)42 (2%)0.9
Cyclosporine24 (24%)27 (13%)0.09
Immunosuppressive treatment at discharge
Triple therapy (steroids + MMF + TAC/EVR)92 (90%)179 (84%)0.3
Dual therapy (steroids + TAC)11 (10%)34 (16%)
Immunosuppressive drugs as maintenance
Steroids4 (4%)35 (17%)0.02
MMF27 (26%)53 (25%)0.9
AZA8 (8%)6 (3%)0.3
Tacrolimus65 (64%)176 (83%)0.007
Everolimus19 (19%)234 (11%)0.2
Cyclosporine20 (20%)27 (13%)0.2
Immunosuppressive maintenance treatment
Triple Therapy (steroids + MMF + TAC/EVR)019 (9%)0.03
Dual Therapy (steroids + TAC)32 (32%)61 (29%)0.6
Monotherapy (TAC/EVR)67 (66%)142 (67%)0.7
Time of steroid therapy10 ± 9 12 ± 160.4
FU months114 ± 4886 ± 560.001
Abbreviations: LT—liver transplantation; BMI—body mass index; MELD—model for end-stage liver disease; NASH—non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; MMF—mycophenolate mofetil; TAC—tacrolimus; EVR—everolimus; MDs—metabolic disorders. The statistically significant data are in bold.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lattanzi, B.; D’Ambrosio, D.; Tavano, D.; Pitoni, D.; Mennini, G.; Ginanni Corradini, S.; Rossi, M.; Merli, M. Weight Gain and De Novo Metabolic Disorders after Liver Transplantation. Nutrients 2019, 11, 3015. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11123015

AMA Style

Lattanzi B, D’Ambrosio D, Tavano D, Pitoni D, Mennini G, Ginanni Corradini S, Rossi M, Merli M. Weight Gain and De Novo Metabolic Disorders after Liver Transplantation. Nutrients. 2019; 11(12):3015. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11123015

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lattanzi, Barbara, Daria D’Ambrosio, Daniele Tavano, Demis Pitoni, Gianluca Mennini, Stefano Ginanni Corradini, Massimo Rossi, and Manuela Merli. 2019. "Weight Gain and De Novo Metabolic Disorders after Liver Transplantation" Nutrients 11, no. 12: 3015. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11123015

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop