BACKGROUND： Immunosuppression reagents have side effects and cause considerable long-term morbidity and mortality in patients after liver transplantation. Sufficient evidences showed that minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppression reagents does not deteriorate the recipient＇s immune response and physiological function and therefore, is feasible in some recipients of liver transplantation. However, the mechanisms are not clear. The present review was to update the current status of immunosuppression in liver transplantation and the mechanism of minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppression in liver recipients.DATA SOURCES： We searched articles in English on minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppression in liver transplantation in Pub Med. We focused on the basic mechanisms of immune tolerance in liver transplantation. Studies on immunosuppression minimization or withdrawal protocols and biomarker in tolerant recipients were also analyzed.RESULTS： Minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppression can be achieved by the induction of immune tolerance, which may not be permanent and can be affected by various factors. However, accurately evaluating immune status post-transplant is a prerequisite to achieve individualized immunosuppression. Numerous mechanisms for immune tolerance have been found, including immunophenotypic shift of memory CD8＋ T cells and CD4＋ T cell subsets. Activation of the inflammasome through apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a C-terminal caspase recruitment domain（ASC） in dendritic cells is associated with rejection after liver transplantation. CONCLUSIONS： Minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppression can be achieved by the induction of immune toler-ance via different mechanisms. This process could be affected by immunophenotypic shift of memory CD8＋ T cells and CD4＋ T cell subsets, which may be correlated with activation of the inflammasome through ASC in dendritic cells.
BACKGROUND: Collateralized intraand extra-hepatic routes in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) were important. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and clinical outcomes of the staged management of BCS based on the degree of compensation provided by intraor extra-hepatic collateral circulations. METHODS: A total of 103 adult patients with BCS caused by co-obstruction of the inferior vena cava (IVC) and main hepatic veins (MHVs) between March 2001 and October 2009 were enrolled in this study. Based on the pathological classification and degree of hemodynamic compensation by collateral circulations, treatment priority for IVC hypertension was determined in the first-stage treatment. Patients were deemed eligible for second-stage treatment when the first-stage treatment failed to relieve. RESULTS: Imaging results revealed that most patients had collateral circulations to different extents. Based on the degree of compensation provided by these collateral circulations, 74 patients underwent single-stage treatment for IVC hypertension, i.e., radiologic intervention (RI) for 61 patients and surgical procedures (SPs) for 13. One patient was treated for portal hypertension. Twenty-nine patients underwent second-stage treatment (25 underwent RI and SP, and 4 only SP). The general morbidity and mortality after all procedures were 8.3% and 1.5%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 35 months, 4 patients underwent second-stage treatment and 7 underwent recanalization of the IVC/MHVs. Two patients died of hepatocellular carcinoma and 1 died of graft obstruction. CONCLUSION: Staged management produces excellent outcomes for patients with BCS caused by co-obstruction of the IVC and MHVs.
