Validation and refinement of survival models for liver retransplantation

Waiting list mortality among children listed for heart transplantation in the United States

BACKGROUND

Children listed for heart transplantation face the highest waiting list mortality in solid-organ transplantation medicine. We examined waiting list mortality since the pediatric heart allocation system was revised in 1999 to determine whether the revised allocation system is prioritizing patients optimally and to identify specific high-risk populations that may benefit from emerging pediatric cardiac assist devices.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a multicenter cohort study using the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. All children <18 years of age who were listed for a heart transplant between 1999 and 2006 were included. Among 3098 children, the median age was 2 years (interquartile range 0.3 to 12 years), and median weight was 12.3 kg (interquartile range 5 to 38 kg); 1294 (42%) were nonwhite; and 1874 (60%) were listed as status 1A (of whom 30% were ventilated and 18% were on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Overall, 533 (17%) died, 1943 (63%) received transplants, and 252 (8%) recovered; 370 (12%) remained listed. Multivariate predictors of waiting list mortality include extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support (hazard ratio [HR] 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.4 to 3.9), ventilator support (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.6 to 2.4), listing status 1A (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.7), congenital heart disease (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.6), dialysis support (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.0), and nonwhite race/ethnicity (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.0).

CONCLUSIONS

US waiting list mortality for pediatric heart transplantation remains unacceptably high in the current era. Specific high-risk subgroups can be identified that may benefit from emerging pediatric cardiac assist technologies. The current pediatric heart-allocation system captures medical urgency poorly. Further research is needed to define the optimal organ-allocation system for pediatric heart transplantation.

Retransplantation for end-stage liver disease: a single-center Asian experience

Liver retransplantation carries a significantly higher morbidity and mortality compared with patients after single transplantations. The aim of this study was to review our outcomes in liver retransplantations. From February 1984 to February 2007, 409 liver transplantations were performed on 396 patients, including 13 retransplantations (3.2%) in 12 patients. The mean follow-up was 1.6 +/- 0.4 years (range, 0.1-5.2). The mean duration between the first and the second transplantation was 2.8 +/- 1.0 years (range, 15 days-11.6 years). The indications for the first liver transplantation included biliary atresia (n = 3), hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhosis with hepatoma (n = 3), fulminant hepatic failure (n = 2), HBV-related end-stage liver disease (n = 1), hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related end-stage liver disease (n = 1), neonatal hepatitis (n = 1), and glycogen storage disease (n = 1). The indications for retransplantations were secondary biliary cirrhosis (n = 3), veno-occlusive disease-related liver failure (n = 2), hepatic arterial occlusion and graft failure (n = 2), chronic rejection with hepatic graft failure (n = 2), recurrent HBV (n = 1) and de novo HBV-related decompensated cirrhosis (n = 1), and idiopathic graft failure (n = 1). There were 4 living donor and 9 deceased donor liver retransplantations. The cumulative survival rate was 71.4 +/- 14.4%, with an estimated mean survival time of 3.9 +/- 0.7 years. Our results showed that minimizing the rate of retransplantation was critical to enhance overall patient survival. Moreover, living donor liver retransplantation is another option within the short, yet critical, waiting period, after failure of the first graft. Provided that a suitable living donor is available, we recommend early retransplantation to minimize the risk of morbidity and mortality.

Report of the Paris consensus meeting on expanded criteria donors in liver transplantation

Because of organ shortage and a constant imbalance between available organs and candidates for liver transplantation, expanded criteria donors are needed. Experience shows that there are wide variations in the definitions, selection criteria, and use of expanded criteria donors according to different geographic areas and different centers. Overall, selection criteria for donors have tended to be relaxed in recent years. Consensus recommendations are needed. This article reports the conclusions of a consensus meeting held in Paris in March 2007 with the contribution of experts from Europe, the United States, and Asia. Definitions of expanded criteria donors with respect to donor variables (including age, liver function tests, steatosis, infections, malignancies, and heart-beating versus non-heart-beating, among others) are proposed. It is emphasized that donor quality represents a continuum of risk rather than "good or bad." A distinction is made between donor factors that generate increased risk of graft failure and factors independent of graft function, such as transmissible infectious disease or donor-derived malignancy, that may preclude a good outcome. Updated data concerning the risks associated with different donor variables in different recipient populations are given. Recommendations on how to safely expand donor selection criteria are proposed.

Hepatitis C and liver transplantation: enhancing outcomes and should patients be retransplanted

Hepatitis C (HCV)-related end-stage liver disease is the most common indication for liver transplantation. Safe expansion of the donor pool with improved rates of deceased donation and more widespread use of living and extended criteria donation are likely to decrease wait list mortality. In addition, improved antiviral treatments and a better understanding of the delicate balance between under- and over-immunosuppression in this population are needed. Finally, when recurrent advanced fibrosis occurs, the criteria for patient selection for retransplantation remain widely debated. This article reviews the literature on these topics and the work being done in each area to maximize outcomes in patients receiving transplants for HCV-related cirrhosis.

Improving outcomes of liver retransplantation: an analysis of trends and the impact of Hepatitis C infection

Retransplantation (RT) in Hepatitis C (HCV) patients remains controversial.

AIMS

To study trends in RT and evaluate the impact of HCV status in the context of a comprehensive recipient and donor risk assessment. The UNOS database between 1994 and October 2005 was utilized to analyze 46 982 LT and RT. Graft and patient survival along with patient and donor characteristics were compared for 2283 RT performed in HCV and non-HCV patients during 1994-1997, 1998-2001 and 2002-October 2005. Overall HCV prevalence at RT increased from 36% in the initial period to 40.6% after 2002. In our study group, 1-year patient and graft survival post-RT improved over the same time intervals from 65.0% to 70.7% and 54.87% to 65.8%, respectively. HCV was only associated with decreased patient and graft survival with a retransplant (LT-RT) interval (RI) >90 days. Independent predictors of mortality for RT with RI >90 days were patient age, MELD score >25, RI <1 year, warm ischemia time > or =75 min and donor age > or =60 (significant for HCV patients only). Outcomes of RT are improving, but can be optimized by weighing recipient factors, anticipation of operative factors and donor selection.

Liver retransplantation of patients with hepatitis C infection is associated with acceptable patient and graft survival

Infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause of liver transplantation (LT), while liver retransplantation (RT) for HCV is controversial as a result of concerns over poor outcomes. We sought to compare patient and graft survival after RT in patients with and without HCV. We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing RT at our center between February 1998 and April 2004. Indications for RT, HCV status, patient, and donor characteristics, laboratory values, and hospitalization status at RT were collected. A total of 108 patients (48 HCV and 60 non-HCV) underwent RT during the study period, with mean post-RT follow-up of 1,096 days (range, 0-2,888 days). Grafts from donors aged>60 years were used less frequently in HCV patients at RT (6%) compared with LT (47%), P<0.001. There was no difference between HCV vs. non-HCV patients in 1- and 3-year patient survival (respectively, 79% vs. 63%, and 71% vs. 63%) and graft survival (respectively, 67% vs. 66%, and 59% vs. 56%). Post-RT mortality and graft failure in HCV patients occurred within the first year in 89% of patients, and 83% were unrelated to HCV recurrence. We conclude that patients should not be excluded from consideration for retransplantation solely on the basis of a diagnosis of HCV.

Retransplantation for hepatitis C: results of a U.S. multicenter retransplant study

It is widely perceived that outcomes are relatively poor following retransplantation (reTX) for recurrent of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Transplant centers debate the utility of offering another liver to these patients. A U.S. study group was formed to retrospectively compare survival after reTX in patients with recurrent HCV (histologically proven) and those transplanted for other indications greater than 90 days after first transplantation, from 1996 to 2004. Patients were divided into 3 groups; group 1: HCV reTX (n = 43), group 2: non-HCV reTX (n = 73), and group 3: recurrent HCV but no reTX (n = 156). They were predominantly male, Caucasian, with mean age of 47.2 yr. The commonest indications for non-HCV reTX were chronic rejection (36%), hepatic artery thrombosis (31%) and recurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis (17%). Duration of hospitalization, number of intensive care unit (ICU) days, and time interval from listing to transplantation or reTX were similar between reTX groups. The 1-yr and 3-yr survival rates after reTX were also similar for HCV reTX and non-HCV reTX groups (1 yr, 69% vs. 73%; 3 yr, 49% vs. 55%). Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were not predictive of survival from reTX. However, with a MELD score of >30 in the non HCV group, survival was <50%. In the recurrent HCV not undergoing reTX group, 30% were reevaluated for reTX but only 15% were listed for reTX and the 3-yr survival was 47%. The most common reasons for not listing for reTX were recurrent HCV within 6 months (22%), fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (19%), and renal dysfunction (9%). In conclusion, patients retransplanted for recurrent HCV had similar 1-yr and 3-yr survival when compared to patients undergoing reTX for other indications. MELD scores were not predictive of post-reTX survival. Survival was <50% in the non-HCV reTx group with MELD score of >30. Many patients with recurrent HCV are not considered for reTX and die from recurrent disease.

Donor factors predicting recipient survival after liver retransplantation: the retransplant donor risk index

The use of extended criteria liver donors (ECD) is controversial, especially in the setting of retransplantation. The aims of this study are to investigate the effects of ECD grafts on retransplantation and to develop a predictive mortality index in liver retransplantation based on the previously established donor risk index. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) liver transplant dataset was analyzed for all adult, non-status 1, liver retransplantations occurring in the United States since February 2002. All donors were categorized for multiple characteristics of ECD, and using multivariate survival models a retransplant donor risk index (ReTxDRI) was developed. A total of 1327 retransplants were analyzed. There were 611 (46%) recipients who received livers with at least one ECD criterion. The use of ECD grafts in recipients with HCV did not incur worse survival than the non-ECD grafts. The addition of the cause of recipient graft failure to the donor risk index formed the ReTxDRI. After adjusting for multiple recipient factors, the ReTxDRI was predictive of overall recipient survival and was a strongly independent predictor of death after retransplantation (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.89-3.27, p < 0.0001). The use of the ReTxDRI can improve recipient and donor matching and help to optimize posttransplant survival in liver retransplantation.

Management of hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been associated with progression to cirrhosis in approximately 20% of patients, 5 years postoperatively. Accelerated decompensation has also been noted when compared with cirrhosis in non-transplant patients. Different treatment strategies are available for recurrent HCV infection post-OLT, but efforts are hindered by the modest response rates, poor tolerability and the risk of rejection as well as graft loss. Anti-HCV immunoglobulin therapy to prevent graft infection with HCV has no established role at present but studies are ongoing. Treatment prior to transplantation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has been evaluated but the results are too preliminary to make firm recommendations. Prophylactic interferon-based antiviral therapy in the early postoperative period to prevent graft infection was shown to have low response rates and high rates of adverse effects. Treatment of established recurrent HCV infection with combination peginterferon (pegylated interferon) and ribavirin is associated with 10-59% sustained virological response and the predictive value of a positive early virological response has been validated in the post-transplant setting. Improvement in inflammatory activity after viral eradication is well established, but fibrosis regression or stabilisation is less predictable and factors such as rejection and biliary complications may still contribute to graft loss. Most studies have initiated therapy at least 6 months postoperatively in order to optimise patient tolerance and enable the addition of ribavirin. The use of adjuvant agents to treat drug-induced neutropenia and anaemia in this population is evolving and becoming a crucial part of therapy. Determination of optimal doses of both pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and guidance on when to stop treatment, as well as improving tolerability are important steps in achieving higher response rates and minimising drug toxicity.

Management of hepatitis C virus in the transplant patient

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a leading cause of chronic hepatitis, with 170 to 190 million people infected worldwide. The treatment of choice for patients who have HCV-related cirrhosis with or without hepatocellular carcinoma is liver transplantation. Virologic recurrence is constant after transplantation and results in chronic hepatitis in the vast majority. HCV infection now can be cured in a substantial proportion of liver transplant recipients. This review highlights the available strategies to improve outcome, including modification of factors that affect disease progression and the efficacy of antiviral therapy.

Trends and experiences in liver retransplantation over 15 years

Compared to primary liver transplantation (LT), the inferior results in the outcome of liver retransplantation (re-LT) continue to be a major challenge. The purpose of this study was to analyze changes in and outcomes of re-LT over a period of 15 years at the Charité Virchow Clinic. Between 1989 and 2003, we performed 1,619 LTs and 157 re-LTs (9.7%) in 1,462 patients. A total of 119 retransplants (50 females, 69 males) were analyzed after consideration of exclusion criteria: recipient age <16 years, second re-LT, primary LT as split-liver or living-related LT, or combination with renal transplantation or Whipple operation. All patients received a whole-size organ. Mean follow-up was 62 months (6 days to 187 months). The main indications for re-LT were initial nonfunction (26.9%), recurrence of viral-induced hepatitis (20.2%), or acute and chronic rejection or thrombosis of the hepatic artery (both 16.8%). The main causes of death were bacterial infections (26.0%) as well as bleeding complications or recurrence of disease (both 16.0%) within the first postoperative month. Overall, 50 out of 119 patients (42%) died after re-LT, 26 patients within the first 3 months and 38 within 1 year. Overall patient survival was 89.9% after 1 month, 78.2% after 1 year, and 67.1% after 5 years. In conclusion, our study showed good clinical results after re-LT. Apart from the changing indications for re-LT with an increasing amount of initial organ failure and hepatic artery thrombosis, the analysis also showed a decreasing amount of complications such as rejection, ischemic type biliary lesions, and recurrence of the disease with unchanged outcome over a period of 15 years.

Hepatitis C virus and liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains the most common cause of hepatic failure requiring orthotopic liver transplantation, and the disparity between the number of patients in need of liver replacement and the number of organs available continues to grow. Unfortunately, without viral eradication before transplantation, HCV recurrence is universal and is associated with poor graft and patient survival. Despite expansion of the donor pool and attempts to suppress HCV activity with various pretransplant and posttransplant antiviral therapies, many questions remain. This article reviews the literature regarding the evaluation of patients for transplantation, the antiviral therapies available in the peritransplant period, the immunosuppressive regimens, used, and the approach to patients with recurrent HCV infection.

Retransplantation of the liver

Retransplantation (re-TX) is the only available therapy for irreversible liver graft dysfunction. The outcome of a second procedure depends upon several factors, some of which are not defined at the time of the decision to retransplant. This study is an analysis of all re-TX of the liver performed at our unit between January 1995 and January 2004. Among the 474 liver TX were 55 (11.6%) re-TX in 47 patients. We studied (1) diagnosis at first TX; (2) indication for re-TX and time lapse; (3) donor age and cold ischemia time (CIT); (4) duration of operation, peroperative bleeding, and complications; (5) ICU and ward periods; and (6) patient and graft survivals. Patients who underwent re-TX did not differ from those transplanted once with regard to age, gender, or diagnosis. The indications for re-TX were roughly one-third biliary tract complications/chronic rejection, one-third hepatic artery thrombosis, and one-third others, including primary nonfunction, acute rejection, portal vein thrombosis, sepsis, and B/C hepatitis. The re-TX were "urgent" in 29 and "elective" in 26 cases. Complications were common; about half of the patients were reoperated due to bleeding or biliary problems. To date (May 2004), 15 patients have died (12 "urgent" and 3 "elective"), of whom 5 had well functioning grafts. In summary, liver re-TX is a complicated procedure associated with significant mortality and morbidity, but considering that the actual patient group has a poor prognosis without re-TX, the results are nevertheless encouraging.

Liver retransplantation: a model for determining long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Because of the worse results from retransplantation in relation to the initial liver transplantation, there is a need to refine the indication for retransplantation, such that fair distribution of this benefit is obtained.

METHODS

This was a study of 139 patients who underwent liver retransplantation. Thirty variables were studied: 18 relating to the recipient and 12 to the donor. All the independent variables were initially compared with the length of survival using univariate analyses. Variables presenting significance were compared with the dependent variable of length of survival, to determine which factors were related to longer survival among patients, when evaluated together.

RESULTS

A multivariate model for determining long-term survival among patients with retransplants was built up using the following variables: recipient's age, creatinine, urgency of retransplantation and early failure of the first graft. Through this multivariate model it was possible to determine a score that was categorized according to tertile distributions (below the 33rd percentile, score <24; 33rd to 66th percentile, 24 < or = score < or = 32; above the 66th percentile, score > 32). One-year, 3-year, and 5-year patient survival rates following retransplantation were respectively 85%, 82%, and 77% for scores <24; 69%, 66%, and 61% for scores between 24 and 32; and 21%, 19%, and 16% for scores >32 (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The variables of recipient's age, creatinine, urgency of retransplantation, and early failure of the initial transplantation were factors that were independently related to the long-term survival of patients with liver retransplants.

Treating hepatitis C infection in liver transplant recipients

Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a growing problem worldwide, with up to 300 million individuals infected, and those with chronic infection are at risk for cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. HCV infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States and Europe. Unfortunately, although transplantation is effective for treating decompensated cirrhosis and limited hepatocellular carcinoma associated with hepatitis C, HCV reinfection is virtually the rule among transplant recipients. Reinfection of the graft is associated with more rapidly progressive disease, with a median time to cirrhosis of 8 to 10 yr. Unfortunately, treatment of chronic HCV in liver transplant recipients is suboptimal. Combination therapy with interferon (pegylated and nonpegylated forms) plus ribavirin appears to provide maximum benefits. Drug therapy is usually administered for recurrent disease. No prophylactic therapy is available. Preemptive regimens offer no distinctive advantages over treatments begun for recurrent disease. Overall, treatment is poorly tolerated, with frequent need for dose reductions, especially from cytopenias, and drug discontinuations in up to 50% of patients. Optimizing drug doses is important in maximizing sustained virological response rates. Future therapies may include ribavirin alternatives with lower rates of anemia, alternative interferons with lower rates of cytopenias, and new antiviral drugs that can be used alone or in combination with either interferon or ribavirin to enhance sustained virological response rates and improve tolerability. Liver Transpl 12:1192-1204, 2006. (c) 2006 AASLD.

A systematic review of the performance of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in the setting of liver transplantation

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is now used for allocation in liver transplantation (LT) waiting lists, replacing the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score. However, there is debate as whether it is superior to CTP score to predict mortality in patients with cirrhosis on the LT waiting list and after LT. We reviewed studies comparing the accuracy of MELD vs. CTP score in transplantation settings. We found that in studies of the LT waiting list (12,532 patients with cirrhosis), only 4 of 11 showed MELD to be superior to CTP in predicting short-term (3-month) mortality. In addition, 2 of 3 studies (n = 1,679) evaluating the changes in MELD score (DeltaMELD) showed that DeltaMELD had better prediction for mortality than the baseline MELD score. The impact of MELD on post-LT mortality was assessed in 15 studies (20,456 patients); only 6 (9,522 patients) evaluated the discriminative ability of MELD score using the concordance (c) statistic (the MELD score had always a c-statistic < 0.70). In 11 studies (19,311 patients), high MELD score indicated poor post-LT mortality for cutoff values of 24-40 points. In re-LT patients, 2 of 4 studies evaluated the discriminative ability of MELD score on post-LT mortality. Finally, several studies have shown that the predictive ability of MELD score increases by adding clinical variables (hepatic encephalopathy, ascites) or laboratory (sodium) parameters. On the basis of the current literature, MELD score does not perform better than the CTP score for patients with cirrhosis on the waiting list and cannot predict post-LT mortality.

Diagnosis and management of allograft failure

The article focuses on diagnosis and management of allograft failure in four main categories: (1) ischemic-reperfusion injury (primary nonfunction), (2) technical complications (hepatic artery and portal vein thrombosis), (3) chronic rejection, and (4) recurrent disease. It also discusses the complex problems involved in retransplantation for allograft failure.

Management of Recurrent Hepatitis C in Liver Transplant Recipients

Recurrent HCV infection is universal in liver transplant recipients who are viremic pretransplant. The rate of histologic disease progression after transplantation is more rapid, and the risk of cirrhosis by 5 to 10 years is about 30%. Several donor, recipient, and viral factors have been associated with worse post-transplant outcomes in recipients with recurrent hepatitis C. Whether or not HCV-infected recipients of live donor grafts have worse out-comes compared with deceased donor graft recipients is controversial. To maximize the long-term survival of recipients with HCV infection, eradication of infection is the ultimate goal. Treatment of recurrent HCV after liver transplantation can be undertaken at several different time points: (1) prophylactically, at the time of transplantation; (2) pre-emptively, in the early post-transplant period; and (3) after established recurrent histologic disease is present. Prophylactic therapy for HCV infection has no established role at present, but studies are ongoing. Preemptive therapy using IFN and RBV has resulted in variable SVR rates (9%-43%) and is generally poorly tolerated, especially if the patient has advanced liver disease pretransplantation. Treatment of established recurrent HCV disease with combination PEGIFN and RBV is associated with a SVR in about 30% to 35% of patients overall but is limited by high rates of dose reduction or drug discontinuation. In conclusion, successful HCV eradication in the post-transplant setting is difficult with current treatment options, but it is possible. Determination of the optimal doses of antiviral drugs in transplant patients and improvements in drug tolerability may be important first steps in achieving enhanced response rates. There is a need for new drugs in this population that have greater efficacy and a better safety profile.

Management of hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) disease is the leading cause of graft loss in liver transplant recipients with pre-transplant HCV infection. While natural history is variable, median time to recurrent cirrhosis is less than a decade. Factors contributing to risk of recurrence and rate of fibrosis progression are only partially known. Older donor age, treatment of acute rejection, cytomegalovirus infection and high pre-transplant viral load are most consistently linked with worse outcomes. Whether these factors can be modified to positively impact on HCV disease progression is unknown. The main therapeutic approach for patients with recurrent HCV disease has been the treatment with interferon and ribavirin (RBV) once recurrent disease is documented or progressive. Efficacy is lower than in nontransplant patients and tolerability, especially of RBV, is a major limitation. Stable or improved fibrosis scores are seen in the majority of sustained responders. Optimal dose, duration and timing of treatment have not been determined. Alternative strategies under study include pre-transplant treatment of decompensated cirrhotics, preemptive antiviral therapy started within weeks of transplantation and prophylactic therapy using HCV antibodies. Ongoing studies may establish a future role for alternative treatment approaches. Additionally, limited overall efficacy of interferon-based therapy in the transplant setting highlights the urgent need for new drug therapies.

Recurrent hepatitis C after retransplantation: factors affecting graft and patient outcome

Retransplantation (re-LT) of patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) carries significant morbidity and mortality, negatively impacting on an already scarce donor allograft pool. In this study, we investigated the outcome of allografts and patients after re-LT due to recurrent HCV. Between 1989 and 2002, 47 patients were retransplanted at our institution due to HCV-related graft failure. Clinical HCV recurrence after re-LT was diagnosed when patients had acute liver enzyme elevation correlated with histological recurrence. The independent influence of these variables on survival was tested using Cox regression model. Chi-squared tests were used to examine the influence of individual demographic and pre/perioperative variables on recurrence. Thirty-one (66%) patients died after re-LT (median 2.2 months). Donor age >60, clinical HCV recurrence, and graft failure due to cirrhosis were significant risk factors for mortality (risk ratios of 3.6, 3.3, and 2.4, respectively). Pre-LT MELD score was lower among survivors (22+/- 5 vs. 27+/- 8). Following re-LT, 38 patients had at least one biopsy due to acute liver dysfunction; 19 of them (50%) had recurrence within the first 3 months. High-dose solumedrol was correlated with early recurrence. No association was found between time of recurrence after the first LT and time of recurrence after re-LT. In conclusion, patients with cirrhosis due to recurrent HCV undergoing re-LT have an extremely high mortality rate; older allografts should be avoided in retransplanting these patients. The timing of clinical recurrence after initial liver transplantation is not predictive of the timing of recurrence after re-LT. Patients experiencing early graft failure due to accelerated forms of HCV should not be denied re-LT with the expectation that a similar disease course will occur after re-LT.

Hepatic resection in liver transplant recipients: single center experience and review of the literature

Biliary complications such as ischemic (type) biliary lesions frequently develop following liver transplantation, requiring costly medical and endoscopic treatment. If conservative approaches fail, re-transplantation is most often an inevitable sequel. Because of an increasing donor organ shortage and unfavorable outcomes in hepatic re-transplantation, efforts to prolong graft survival become of particular interest. From a series of 1685 liver transplants, we herein report on three patients who underwent partial hepatic graft resection for (ischemic type) biliary lesions. In all cases, left hepatectomy (Couinaud's segments II, III and IV) was performed without Pringle maneuver or mobilization of the right liver. All patients fully recovered postoperatively, but biliary leakage required surgical revision twice in one patient. At last follow-up, two patients presented alive and well. The other patient with persistent hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), however, demonstrated progression of disease in the right liver remnant and required re-transplantation 13 months after hepatic graft resection. Including our own patients, review of the literature identified 24 adult patients who underwent hepatic graft resection. In conclusion, partial graft hepatectomy can be considered a safe and beneficial procedure in selected liver transplant recipients with anatomical limited biliary injury, thereby, preserving scarce donor organs.

Mortality predictors in liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C cirrhosis

BACKGROUND/AIM

Recipients of orthotopic liver transplant for hepatitis C (HCV) invariably develop recurrent disease. The risk factors for death and retransplantation following the development of cirrhosis from HCV are unclear. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of survival in liver transplant recipients who develop cirrhosis from recurrent HCV.

METHODS

We reviewed records of patients who underwent liver transplantation for cirrhosis due to HCV between January 1990 and December 2001. Prognostic factors of patient survival following the development of recurrent cirrhosis were identified through multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

During the study period, 511 patients underwent transplantation for HCV cirrhosis. Of these, 65 patients (13%) developed biopsy proven recurrent cirrhosis from HCV; 43 (8%) were relisted for transplantation, and 24 (5%) underwent retransplantation. The overall Kaplan-Meier patient survival rates after the histologic diagnosis of cirrhosis at 1 and 5 years were 66% and 30%, respectively. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed patients with higher last (i.e. at follow-up or prior to retransplantation) International normalized ratio (INR) values (hazard ratios (HR)=2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.26, 3.24, P<0.01) to have an increased risk of death.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested survival was decreased after the diagnosis of cirrhosis from recurrent HCV. Higher INR was associated with an increased risk of death following the development of cirrhosis.

Treatment of recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States and Europe, and more than 20,000 patients worldwide have undergone transplantation for complications of chronic hepatitis C. In North America, HCV accounts for 15% to 50% of the liver transplants performed in United States transplant programs. To maximize the long-term survival of liver transplant recipients who have HCV infection, eradication of infection is the ultimate goal. Pretransplant antiviral therapy with the goal of achieving viral eradication before transplantation is a consideration in some patients, especially those who have mildly decompensated liver disease. This article focuses on the management of liver transplant recipients who have HCV infection at the time of transplantation. Prophylactic and preemptive therapies, as well as treatment of established recurrent disease, are the strategies reviewed.

Liver retransplantation for hepatitis C virus recurrence: a survey of liver transplant programs in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver failure is the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT). The number requiring re-LT is expected to grow as patients live long enough to develop graft failure and recurrent disease. Numerous factors have been identified as influencing survival after re-LT. To gain insight into how transplant centers are dealing with this issue and whether published prognostic factors are being used, we conducted a survey of liver transplant centers across the US in late 2003.

METHODS

Surveys consisting of 6 multiple-choice questions were sent to all 96 adult transplant medical directors in the U.S.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (57%) surveys were returned. Of these respondents, 95% would offer re-LT for allograft failure caused by recurrent HCV. A little more than half believed age >60 years and development of allograft cirrhosis after <2 years should exclude a patient from re-LT. However, less than half thought international normalized ratio (INR), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), and bilirubin were important factors. After initial LT, 40% of the respondents do not have a protocol for managing HCV recurrence, and 33% responded that they treat only those who develop severe recurrence. In contrast, for re-LT, 67% preemptively treat HCV recurrence. Compared to 5 years ago, 75% believe practice patterns have changed in respect to retransplanting patients with HCV: Most were less likely to offer re-LT because of associated poor long-term survival in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

As of late 2003, nearly all surveyed transplant medical directors in the U.S. would offer re-LT to recurrent HCV. Perceived practice patterns for re-LT are at variance with published outcome data.

Retrasplante hepático: análisis de los resultados en 50 pacientes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Liver re-transplantation (re-LT) is an accepted indication for some (technical problems, primary non-function [PNF]) but not all indications, particularly recurrence of the original disease, such as hepatitis C. We aimed to determine in our center: a) the rate of survival following re-transplantation for all and each different indication; b) to compare it to that obtained by a control group; c) to assess whether late re-LT, excluding PNF and surgical problems, and re-LT in HCV (+) patients are associated with a higher mortality, and d) to estimate medical costs.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Form 1991 to April 2002, 50 re-LT were done (group 1). Group 2 consisted of 45 primary LT controlled by transplant date. Group 1 was divided in two subgroups: a) re-LT after 6 months of the first LT (recurrence of primary liver disease n = 20, chronic rejection n = 5), b) Re-LT in the first 6 months (PNF n = 13, artery thrombosis n = 12). We analyzed donor, recipient, surgical and immunosuppressive-related variables.

RESULTS

The mean age was 50 years (range: 23-63) (72% men). Actuarial survival for re-LT was lower than for the control group: 64%, 57% and 50% vs 84%, 82% and 82% at 1st, 3rd and 5th year, respectively. By indication, the 3-year survival was: PNF: 61% (p = 0.05), HAT: 58% (p = 0.02), recurrence of primary disease: 52% (p = 0.001), chronic rejection: 60% (p = 0.346). Although not reaching statistical significance, survival was lower in late vs early re-LT (p = 0.16) and in HCV-infected versus non-infected patients (p = 0.08). In the HCV (+) group, there were no differences by re-transplant indication (p = 0.8). Medical costs and complications were substantially higher in group 1 vs group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Re-LT is associated with substantial medical costs and mortality, particularly in patients infected with HCV.

Efficacy of MELD score in predicting survival after liver retransplantation

OBJECTIVE

We retrospectively investigated the efficacy of the MELD score to predict the outcome of liver retransplantation and serve as selection criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 1987 to 2003, the 765 liver transplantations included 87 patients (11.4%) who received a second graft. In addition to graft and patient survivals, ROC curves were used to establish the best MELD score to select cases with poor outcomes.

RESULTS

Indications for retransplantation were: 38 (43.7%) surgical complications; 12 (13.8%) chronic rejections; 15 (17.2%) disease recurrences; and 22 (15.3%) primary graft nonfunction. Overall patient survivals at 1, 3, and 5 years were 62.4%, 50.7%, and 49.1%, respectively. A MELD score of 25, calculated by ROC curves, significantly predicted graft and patient survival (44.2% vs 22.5%, P < .05 and 58.6% vs 27.8%, P < .005). During the first 30 postoperative days, patients with a MELD higher than 25 lost the second graft in 48% of cases compared to 16% in the other group (P < .005). Patients retransplanted for primary graft nonfunction showed significant lower 5-year survival rates than those for other indications (28.6% vs 54.5%, P < .05) and higher mean MELD score (30.7 vs 21.9, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

A MELD score of 25 is a valid cut-off to predict the outcome of retransplantations, it may be useful to select patients among those who require a second graft. Cases with primary graft nonfunction displayed lower survival, because of their compromised clinical status as evidenced by their high MELD scores.

Retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C in the MELD era: maximizing utility

1. Retransplantation (re-LT) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence is controversial. Although re-LT accounts for 10% of all liver transplants (LTs), the number of patients requiring re-LT is expected to grow as primary LT recipients survive long enough to develop graft failure from recurrent disease. 2. Utility, as applied to the medical ethics of transplantation, refers to allocating organs to those individuals who will make the best use of them. The utility function (U) of liver transplantation is represented by the product of outcome (O = 1-year survival with LT) times emergency (E = 3-month mortality without LT), i.e., U = O x E. 3. For primary LT, maximal U is achieved by allocating organs at the highest model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (i.e., "sickest first"). No significant differences exist between HCV and non-HCV diagnoses. 4. For re-LT, maximal utility for HCV and non-HCV diagnoses are achieved at MELD scores of 21 and 24, respectively. Utility starts to decline at MELD scores above 28. 5. The current allocation system (MELD) fails to maximize utility with regard to re-LT.

Preoperative delta-MELD score does not independently predict mortality after liver transplantation

Changes in model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of > or = 5 points over 30 days (delta-MELD) is an independent predictor for death in patients awaiting liver transplantation. The aim of the current study was to determine if a positive change in MELD score occurring over the 30 days immediately prior to liver transplantation was predictive of posttransplant mortality. MELD scores from the day of transplantation and 30 days prior to transplantation were calculated for 1510 UNOS patients and used to compute a delta-MELD score. Multivariate modeling determined predictors of posttransplant mortality. Patients with a preoperative delta-MELD > or = 5 had higher absolute MELD scores at transplant, shorter mean posttransplant survival and higher mortality. However, multivariate analysis showed that none of the excess mortality was attributable to the high delta-MELD score (p = 0.43 for delta-MELD > or = 5) and the majority of the excess risk was attributable to absolute MELD score (p < 0.001) at the time of transplantation. Mortality of patients with rapidly worsening chronic liver disease who undergo transplantation depends substantially on absolute MELD score at the time of transplantation but not the rate of change immediately preceding transplant. Allocation policymakers should consider that a high delta-MELD in the immediate pretransplant period does not indicate greater posttransplant mortality.

Prediction of survival after liver retransplantation for late graft failure based on preoperative prognostic scores

The current policy for determining priority for organ allocation is based on the model for end stage liver disease (MELD). We hypothesize that severity of graft dysfunction assessed by either the MELD score or the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score correlates with mortality after liver retransplantation (re-OLT). To test this hypothesis, we analyzed the outcome of 40 consecutive patients who received re-OLT more than 90 days after primary orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The Kaplan-Meier 1-year and 5-year survival rates after re-OLT were 69% and 62%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) values generated by the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were 0.82 (CI 0.70-0.94) and 0.68 (CI 0.49-0.86), respectively (P =.11), for the CTP and MELD models in predicting 1-year mortality after re-OLT. The 1-year and 5-year survival rates for patients with CTP scores less than 10 were 100% versus 50% and 40%, respectively, for CTP scores of at least 10 (P =.0006). Patients with MELD scores less than or equal to 25 had 1-year and 5-year survival rates of 89% and 79%, respectively, versus 53% and 47%, respectively, for MELD scores greater than 25 (P =.038). Other mortality predictors include hepatic encephalopathy, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and creatinine level of 2 mg/dL or higher. Analysis of an independent cohort of 49 patients showed a trend for a correlation between CTP and MELD scores with 1-year mortality, with AUC of 0.59 and 0.57, in respective ROC curves. In conclusion, our results suggest that severity of graft failure based on CTP and MELD scores may be associated with worse outcome after re-OLT and provide a cautionary note for the "sickest first" policy of organ allocation.