IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0107057.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tacrolimus-Based versus Cyclosporine-Based Immunosuppression in Hepatitis C Virus-Infected Patients after Liver Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Zhenmin Liu
  • Yi Chen
  • Renchuan Tao
  • Jing Xv
  • Jianyuan Meng
  • Xiangzhi Yong

Abstract

Background: Most liver transplant recipients receive calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs), especially tacrolimus and cyclosporine, as immunosuppressant agents to prevent rejection. A controversy exists as to whether the outcomes of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected liver transplant patients differ based on the CNIs used. This meta-analysis compares the clinical outcomes of tacrolimus-based and cyclosporine-based immunosuppression, especially cases of HCV recurrence in liver transplant patients with end-stage liver disease caused by HCV infection. Methods: Related articles were identified from the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase. Meta-analyses were performed for the results of homogeneous studies. Results: Nine randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials were included. The total effect size of mortality (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.77–1.25, P = 0.87) and graft loss (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83–1.33, P = 0.67) showed no significant difference between the two groups irrespective of duration of immunosuppressant therapy after liver transplantation. In addition, the HCV recurrence-induced mortality (RR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.66–1.89, P = 0.69), graft loss (RR = 1.62, 95% CI: 0.64–4.07, P = 0.31) and retransplantation (RR = 1.40, 95% CI: 0.48–4.09, P = 0.54), as well as available biopsies, confirmed that histological HCV recurrences (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.71–1.19, P = 0.51) were similar. Conclusion: These results suggested no difference in posttransplant HCV recurrence-induced mortality, graft loss and retransplantation, as well as histological HCV recurrence in patients treated with tacrolimus-based and cyclosporine-based immunosuppresion.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhenmin Liu & Yi Chen & Renchuan Tao & Jing Xv & Jianyuan Meng & Xiangzhi Yong, 2014. "Tacrolimus-Based versus Cyclosporine-Based Immunosuppression in Hepatitis C Virus-Infected Patients after Liver Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-8, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0107057
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0107057
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0107057&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0107057?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gorden Muduma & Rhodri Saunders & Isaac Odeyemi & Richard F Pollock, 2016. "Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Tacrolimus versus Ciclosporin as Primary Immunosuppression After Liver Transplant," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0107057. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.