Liver transplantation from donors aged 80 years and over: pushing the limit

Having a Healthy Birth With a 100-Year-Old Liver

In March 2008, a 19-year-old woman required emergency liver transplantation due to acute-on-chronic liver failure. No living donor candidate was available. A marginal deceased liver that had been rejected by all the other centers was offered. The liver belonged to a 93-year-old woman and contained a hydatid cyst. Because of low donation rates in our country, we chose to accept the 93-year-old liver. The postoperative early and late courses were fortunately uneventful. Five years after transplantation, the woman became pregnant and gave birth to a healthy female baby. Today, the ages of the baby, mother, and the transplanted liver are 1, 26, and 100 years, respectively. A nonagenarian liver with hydatid disease was able to sustain its viability in a younger woman after transplant and also helped her bring in a new life into the world.

Extended criteria donors in liver transplantation Part I: reviewing the impact of determining factors

The definition and factors of extended criteria donors have already been set; however, details of the various opinions still differ in many respects. In this review, we summarize the impact of these factors and their clinical relevance. Elderly livers must not be allocated for hepatitis C virus (HCV) positives, or patients with acute liver failure. In cases of markedly increased serum transaminases, donor hemodynamics is an essential consideration. A prolonged hypotension of the donor does not always lead to an increase in post-transplantation graft loss if post-OLT care is proper. Hypernatremia of less than 160 mEq/L is not an absolute contraindication to accept a liver graft per se. The presence of steatosis is an independent and determinant risk factor for the outcome. The gold standard of the diagnosis is the biopsy. This is recommended in all doubtful cases. The use of HCV+ grafts for HCV+ recipients is comparable in outcome. The leading risk factor for HCV recurrence is the actual RNA positivity of the donor. The presence of a proper anti-HBs level seems to protect from de novo HBV infection. A favourable outcome can be expected if a donation after cardiac death liver is transplanted in a favourable condition, meaning, a warm ischemia time < 30 minutes, cold ischemia time < 8-10 hours, and donor age 50-60 years. The pathway of organ quality assessment is to obtain the most relevant information (e.g. biopsy), consider the co-existing donor risk factors and the reserve capacity of the recipient, and avoid further technical issues.

Transplantation With Livers From Deceased Donors Older Than 75 Years

BACKGROUND

The availability of donor organs limits the number of patients in need who are offered liver transplantation. Measures to expand the donor pool are crucial to prevent on-list mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of livers from deceased donors who were older than 75 years.

METHODS

Fifty-four patients who received a first liver transplant (D75 group) from 2001 to 2011 were included. Donor and recipient data were collected from the Nordic Liver Transplant Registry and medical records. The outcome was compared with a control group of 54 patients who received a liver graft from donors aged 20 to 49 years (D20-49 group). Median donor age was 77 years (range, 75-86 years) in the D75 group and 41 years (range, 20-49 years) in the D20-49 group. Median recipient age was 59 years (range, 31-73 years) in the D75 group and 58 years (range, 31-74 years) in the D20-49 group.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient/graft survival values were 87/87%, 81/81%, and 71/67% for the D75 group and 88/87%, 75/73%, and 75/73% for the D20-49 group, respectively. Patient (P = 0.89) and graft (P = 0.79) survival did not differ between groups. The frequency of biliary complications was higher in the D75 group (29.6/13%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Selected livers from donors over age 75 years should not be excluded based on age, which does not compromise patient or graft survival despite a higher frequency of biliary complications.

Kidney and liver transplantation in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Transplant surgery is facing a shortage of deceased donor organs. In response, the criteria for organ donation have been extended, and an increasing number of organs from older donors are being used. For recipients, the benefits of transplantation are great, and the growing ageing population has led to increasing numbers of elderly patients being accepted for transplantation.

METHODS

The literature was reviewed to investigate the impact of age of donors and recipients in abdominal organ transplantation, and to highlight aspects of the fine balance in donor and recipient selection and screening, as well as allocation policies fair to young and old alike.

RESULTS

Overall, kidney and liver transplantation from older deceased donors have good outcomes, but are not as good as those from younger donors. Careful donor selection based on risk indices, and potentially biomarkers, special allocation schemes to match elderly donors with elderly recipients, and vigorous recipient selection, allows good outcomes with increasing age of both donors and recipients. The results of live kidney donation have been excellent for donor and recipient, and there is a trend towards inclusion of older donors. Future strategies, including personalized immunosuppression for older recipients as well as machine preservation and reconditioning of donor organs, are promising ways to improve the outcome of transplantation between older donors and older recipients.

CONCLUSION

Kidney and liver transplantation in the elderly is a clinical reality. Outcomes are good, but can be optimized by using strategies that modify donor risk factors and recipient co-morbidities, and personalized approaches to organ allocation and immunosuppression.

Systematic computer tomographic scans 7 days after liver transplantation surgery can lower rates of repeat-transplantation due to arterial complications

Arterial complications are a major cause of graft lost after liver transplantation (LT). The aim of our study was to assess the clinical impact of systematic early postoperative injected computed tomographic (CT) scans after LT rather than its performance on demand in the event of abnormalities. Two series of consecutive transplantation patients in different periods (1997-1999, 231 patients versus 2008-2010, 250 patients) were analyzed. During the first period, an injected CT scan was only performed in the event of clinical, biological, or ultrasound abnormalities revealed by tests performed daily during the first week after surgery. During the second period, in addition to standard follow-up examination, an injected CT scan was performed systematically at approximately postoperative day 7. During the first (versus the more recent) period, both recipients (whose ages were 46 ± 13 years versus 50 ± 12 years; P = .004) and donors (whose ages were 42 ± 17 versus 52 ± 17 years; P = .0001) were younger and end-stage liver disease was more common (34% versus 12%; P = .0001), but hepatocellular carcinoma (7% vs 26%; P = .0001) and retransplantation (2% versus 7%; P = .01) were less frequent. Postoperative mortality was higher during the first period (14% versus 4%; P = .0003). The incidence of early arterial thrombosis (<1 month) was similar (1.3% versus 1.6%; P = .78), but that of arterial stenosis was higher with a systematic CT scan (1.7 versus 4.4; P = .07). As a consequence of the early detection and treatment of arterial abnormalities, the repeat LT rate due to late arterial thrombosis was nil in the second period and 2.1% (5/231) in the first period. In conclusion, a systematic CT angiogram at the end of the first postoperative week reduced retransplantation rates due to late hepatic artery thrombosis by detecting patients at risk who required specific treatment.

The Influence of Aging on Hepatic Regeneration and Early Outcome after Portal Vein Occlusion: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Portal vein occlusion (PVO) is used to increase inadequate future liver remnant volume (FLRV). Impaired liver regeneration has been reported in aged animals. This study was designed to evaluate the impact of patient age on hepatic regeneration.

METHODS

Sixty patients aged ≥70 years were matched 1:1 with 60 patients aged <70 years. Matching criteria were sex, diabetes, cirrhosis, pre-PVO chemotherapy and bevacizumab administration, and jaundice.

RESULTS

The median ages in the older and younger groups were 76 (range 70-83) years and 59 (range 20-69) years, respectively (p < 0.001). Median FLRV following PVO (33.1 ± 6.8 vs. 31.9 ± 6.0 %) and volumetric increase (0.52 ± 0.35 vs. 0.49 ± 0.34) were similar in the two groups. Of the older and younger patients, 10 % and 1.7 %, respectively, did not undergo liver surgery after PVO (p = 0.051). Mortality (5.5 vs. 6.7 %) and major morbidity (25.9.8 vs. 22 %) rates were similar. Liver failure rate was higher in older patients (35.1 vs. 16.9 %, p < 0.026), mainly due to Grade A liver failure (20.3 vs. 8.4 %, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that age ≥ 70 years [odds ratio (OR) 3.03; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.18-7.78; p = 0.020] and biliary cancer diagnosis (OR 4.69; 95 % CI 1.81-12.09; p = 0.001) were independent risk factors for postoperative liver failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver regeneration after PVO is not impaired by age. Nevertheless, liver resection in elderly patients is performed less often after PVO and carries a higher risk of liver failure.

Effect of donor age on graft function and long-term survival of recipients undergoing living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Donor shortage is the biggest obstacle in organ transplantation. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been considered as a valuable approach to shortening waiting time. The objectives of this study were to investigate the feasibility of utilizing donors older than 50 years in LDLT and to evaluate the graft function and recipient survival.

METHODS

All LDLT cases (n=159) were divided into the older (donor age≥50 years, n=10) and younger (donor age<50 years, n=149) donor groups. Donor graft and recipient condition pre-, intra- and post-operation were compared between the two groups. In particular, graft functions and recipient survivals were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median donor age was 58.5 (52.5-60.0) years in the older donor group and 25.0 (23.0-32.0) in the younger donor group. There was no significant difference in cold ischemic time, anhepatic phase and operation time between the older and younger donor groups (P>0.05). However, the volume of red blood cell transfused in operation was greater in the older donor group than in the younger donor group (1900 vs 1200 mL, P=0.023). The 1-, 3- and 5-year graft survival rates were 90%, 80% and 80% for the older donor group, and 92%, 87% and 87% for the younger donor group, respectively (P=0.459). The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 100%, 90% and 90% for recipients with older grafts, and 93%, 87% and 87% for those with younger grafts, respectively (P=0.811).

CONCLUSION

It is safe for a LDLT recipient to receive liver from donors older than 50 years, and there is no significant adverse effect on graft function and long-term patients' survival.

Excellent long-term patient and graft survival are possible with appropriate use of livers from deceased septuagenarian and octogenarian donors

BACKGROUND

Although increasing donor age adversely affects survival after liver transplantation, livers have been used from selected deceased donors older than 70 years. Although there are reports of excellent short-term results, long-term results are unknown. Our experience was reviewed with septuagenarian and octogenarian deceased donors to determine long-term outcomes.

METHODS

All primary deceased donor liver transplants performed at our institution between July 1998 and December 2010 were reviewed. Recipients of livers procured after circulatory arrest, split and reduced-size livers and multiple organ transplants were excluded from the study. Patient and graft survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and survival comparisons were made with the log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, 780 patients met inclusion criteria, and 109 patients received livers from donors older than 70 years (range = 70-86). There were no differences in long-term patient (P = 0.67) or graft (P = 0.42) survival between hepatitis C negative recipients of livers from older compared with younger donors. In contrast, 7-year survival for HCV-positive recipients of older donor livers was less than half that of HCV-negative recipients.

DISCUSSION

Transplantation of livers from septua- and octogenarian donors can achieve excellent long-term patient and graft survival for selected HCV-negative patients.

Using old liver grafts for liver transplantation: Where are the limits?

The scarcity of ideal liver grafts for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has led transplant teams to investigate other sources of grafts in order to augment the donor liver pool. One way to get more liver grafts is to use marginal donors, a not well-defined group which includes mainly donors > 60 years, donors with hypernatremia or macrosteatosis > 30%, donors with hepatitis C virus or hepatitis B virus positive serologies, cold ischemia time > 12 h, non-heart-beating donors, and grafts from split-livers or living-related donations. Perhaps the most practical and frequent measure to increase the liver pool, and thus to reduce waiting list mortality, is to use older livers. In the past years the results of OLT with old livers have improved, mainly due to better selection and maintenance of donors, improvements in surgical techniques in donors and recipients, and intra- and post-OLT management. At the present time, sexagenarian livers are generally accepted, but there still exists some controversy regarding the use of septuagenarian and octogenarian liver grafts. The aim of this paper is to briefly review the aging process of the liver and reported experiences using old livers for OLT. Fundamentally, the series of septuagenarian and octogenarian livers will be addressed to see if there is a limit to using these aged grafts.

Expanded criteria donors

The greatest challenge facing liver transplantation today is the shortage of donor livers. Demand far exceeds supply, and this deficit has driven expansion of what is considered an acceptable organ. The evolving standard has not come without costs, however, as each new frontier of expanded donor quality (i.e., advancing donor age, donation after cardiac death, and split liver) may have traded wait-list for post-transplant morbidity and mortality. This article delineates the nature and severity of risk associated with specific deceased donor liver characteristics and recommends strategies to maximally mitigate these risks.

Donor age as a risk factor in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation in a controlled withdrawal protocol programme

BACKGROUND

Results of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation are impaired by graft loss, resulting mainly from non-anastomotic biliary stricture. Donor age is a risk factor in deceased donor liver transplantation, and particularly in DCD liver transplantation. At the authors' institute, age is not an absolute exclusion criterion for discarding DCD liver grafts, DCD donors receive comfort therapy before withdrawal, and cold ischaemia is minimized.

METHODS

All consecutive DCD liver transplantations performed from 2003 to 2012 were studied retrospectively. Three age groups were compared in terms of donor and recipient demographics, procurement and transplantation conditions, peak laboratory values during the first post-transplant 72 h, and results at 1 and 3 years.

RESULTS

A total of 70 DCD liver transplants were performed, including 32 liver grafts from donors aged 55 years or less, 20 aged 56-69 years, and 18 aged 70 years or more. The overall graft survival rate at 1 month, 1 and 3 years was 99, 91 and 72 per cent respectively, with no graft lost secondary to non-anastomotic stricture. No difference other than age was noted between the three groups for donor or recipient characteristics, or procurement conditions. No primary non-function occurred, but one patient needed retransplantation for artery thrombosis. Biliary complications were similar in the three groups. Graft and patient survival rates were no different at 1 and 3 years between the three groups (P = 0.605).

CONCLUSION

Results for DCD liver transplantation from younger and older donors were similar. Donor age above 50 years should not be a contraindication to DCD liver transplantation if other donor risk factors (such as warm and cold ischaemia time) are minimized.

Ethical considerations surrounding survival benefit-based liver allocation

The disparity between the demand for and supply of donor livers has continued to grow over the last 2 decades, and this has placed greater weight on the need for efficient and effective liver allocation. Although the use of extended criteria donors has shown great potential, it remains unregulated. A survival benefit-based model was recently proposed to answer calls to increase efficiency and reduce futile transplants. However, it was previously determined that the current allocation system was not in need of modification and that instead geographic disparities should be addressed. In contrast, we believe that there is a significant need to replace the current allocation system and complement efforts to improve donor liver distribution. We illustrate this need first by identifying major ethical concerns shaping liver allocation and then by using these concerns to identify strengths and shortcomings of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease system and a survival benefit-based model. The latter model is a promising means of improving liver allocation: it incorporates a greater number of ethical principles, uses a sophisticated statistical model to increase efficiency and reduce waste, minimizes bias, and parallels developments in the allocation of other organs. However, it remains limited in its posttransplant predictive accuracy and may raise potential issues regarding informed consent. In addition, the proposed model fails to include quality-of-life concerns and prioritize younger patients. We feel that it is time to take the next steps toward better liver allocation not only through reductions in geographic disparities but also through the adoption of a model better equipped to balance the many ethical concerns shaping organ allocation. Thus, we support the development of a similar model with suggested amendments.

Matching donor to recipient in liver transplantation: Relevance in clinical practice

Achieving optimum outcomes after liver transplantation requires an understanding of the interaction between donor, graft and recipient factors. Within the cohort of patients waiting for a transplant, better matching of the donor organ to the recipient will improve transplant outcomes and benefit the overall waiting list by minimizing graft failure and need for re-transplantation. A PubMed search was conducted to identify published literature investigating the effects of donor factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, viral serology; graft factors such as size and quality, recipient factors such as age, size, gender and transplant factors such as major or minor blood group incompatibility and immunological factors. We also report technical and therapeutic modifications that can be used to manage donor-recipient mismatch identified from literature and the authors’ clinical experience. Multiple donor and recipient factors impact graft survival after liver transplantation. Appropriate matching based on donor-organ-recipient variables, modification of surgical technique and innovative peri-transplant strategies can increase the donor pool by utilizing grafts from marginal donors that are traditionally turned down.

Decadal analysis of deceased organ donation in Spain and the United States linking an increased donation rate and the utilization of older donors

After the foundation of the National Transplant Organization, Spanish rates of deceased donor donation rapidly outpaced US growth over the decade from 1989 to 1999. An analysis of the following decade, 1999-2009, demonstrated a markedly flattened growth curve for Spanish deceased donor organ procurement, which increased only 2.4% from 33.6 to 34.4 donors per million population (pmp). In comparison, over the same decade in the United States, the rate of deceased donation increased from 20.9 to 26.3 donors pmp (25.8%). An age group comparison demonstrated a much higher donation rate among older donors in Spain. For example, the number of donors older than 70 years increased from 3.8 to 8.8 pmp (a 132% increase), and they now constitute 25.4% of all Spanish organ donors. In contrast, the number of US donors older than 70 years increased from 1.0 to 1.3 pmp, and they constitute only 4.4% of total deceased donors. Over the same decade, the number of younger donors (15-30 years old) decreased from 6.6 to 2.5 pmp (a 62% decrease) in Spain, and this contrasted with a slightly increased US donation rate for the same age subgroup (a 15.5% increase from 5.8 to 6.7 pmp). Although older donors were more rarely used in the United States, growth in donation over the 2 decades (1989-2009) was strongly associated with the utilization of donors aged 65 or older (P < 0.01). United Network for Organ Sharing regions demonstrated significant differences in utilization rates for older donors. In conclusion, strategies aimed toward achieving US donation rates equivalent to the Spanish benchmark should target improved utilization rates for older donors in the United States instead of emulating elements of the Spanish organ procurement system.

Septuagenarian and octogenarian donors provide excellent liver grafts for transplantation

BACKGROUND

Wider utilization of liver grafts from donors ≥ 70 years old could substantially expand the organ pool, but their use remains limited by fear of poorer outcomes. We examined the results at our center of liver transplantation (OLT) using livers from donors ≥ 70 years old.

METHODS

From February 2003 to August 2010, we performed 450 OLT including 58 (13%) using donors ≥ 70 whose outcomes were compared with those using donors <70 years old.

RESULTS

Cerebrovascular causes of death predominated among donors ≥ 70 (85% vs 47% in donors <70; P < .001). In contrast, traumatic causes of death predominated among donors <70 (36% vs 14% in donors ≥ 70; P = .002). Unlike grafts from donors <70 years old, grafts from older individuals had no additional risk factors (steatosis, high sodium, or hemodynamic instability). Both groups were comparable for cold and warm ischemia times. No difference was noted in posttransplant peak transaminases, incidence of primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary strictures, or retransplantation rates between groups. The 1- and 5-year patient survivals were 88% and 82% in recipients of livers <70 versus 90% and 84% in those from ≥ 70 years old (P = .705). Recipients of older grafts, who were 6 years older than recipients of younger grafts (P < .001), tended to have a lower laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P = .074).

CONCLUSIONS

Short and mid-term survival following OLT using donors ≥ 70 yo can be excellent provided that there is adequate donor and recipient selection. Septuagenarians and octogenarians with cerebrovascular ischemic and bleeding accidents represent a large pool of potential donors whose wider use could substantially reduce mortality on the OLT waiting list.

Deceased donor risk factors influencing liver transplant outcome

As the pressure for providing liver transplantation to more and more candidates increases, transplant programs have begun to consider deceased donor characteristics that were previously considered unacceptable. With this trend, attention has focused on better defining those donor factors that can impact the outcome of liver transplantation. This review examines deceased donor factors that have been associated with patient or graft survival as well as delayed graft function and other liver transplant results.

Extended donors in liver transplantation

Several criteria are used to differentiate between standard and extended allograft donors. These criteria include deceased after cardiac death, advanced donor age, steatosis, previous malignancy in the donor, hepatitis C virus-positive allografts, human T-cell lymphotropic virus-positive allografts, active infections in the donor, high-risk donors, split liver transplantations, and living donor liver transplantations. Review of the literature can lead each practitioner to incorporate extended criteria donors into their transplant program, thereby individualizing the use of these allografts, increasing the donor pool, and decreasing overall waitlist mortality.

Liver transplantation in the 21st century: expanding the donor options

Over the past decade, use of ECD organs for OLT has allowed many transplant programs to afford patients access to an otherwise scarce resource and to maintain center volume. Although overall posttransplant outcomes are inferior to results with optimal, whole-liver grafts, aggressive utilization of ECD and DCD organs significantly lowers median wait-times for OLT, MELD score at OLT, and death while awaiting transplantation. It is incumbent on the transplant community to provide continued scrutiny of the many factors involved in ECD organ utilization, evaluate the degree of risk and benefit such allografts may impart on particular recipients, and thereby provide suitable “matching” to maximize favorable outcomes. Transplant caregivers need to provide patients with evidence-based care decisions, be good stewards of a scarce resource, and maintain threshold survival results for their programs. This requires balancing the urgency with which a transplant is needed and the utility of such a transplant. There is a clear necessity to pursue additional donor research to improve use of these marginal grafts and assess interventions that enhance the safety of ECD livers.

Results of liver transplantation from donors over 75 years: case control study

INTRODUCTION

The use of elderly donors can increase the pool of organs available for transplant. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of grafts from donors older than 75 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We selected 29 patients transplanted from January 2003 to January 2010 with livers from donors older than 75 years for comparison with a control group (58 patients), selected among patients transplanted immediately before or after each study case. Data analyzed using SPSS 15.0 were considered statistically significant at P < .05.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences were evident in the mean age of donors (78.3 ± 2.9 vs 50.4 ± 17.8 years, P < .001), levels of aspartate aminotransferase alanine aminotransferase (30.8 ± 18.13/24.9 ± 14.4 vs 53.81 ± 68.4/39.37 ± 39.94 U/L, P < .05), and waiting list time of (122.4 ± 94.3 vs 169.2 ± 135.5 days, P = .034) of elderly donor versus control graft cohorts. The median follow-up was 32 months (range: 4-88.0) No differences were observed at 1 and 3 years after transplantation: graft survival was 78% and 61% in the older donor group and 83% and 71% in the younger donor group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of expanded donors from elderly subjects can increase the donor pool with good results.

The umbilical cord: a rich and ethical stem cell source to advance regenerative medicine

Science and medicine place a lot of hope in the development of stem cell research and regenerative medicine. This review will define the concept of regenerative medicine and focus on an abundant stem cell source - neonatal tissues such as the umbilical cord. Umbilical cord blood has been used clinically for over 20 years as a cell source for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Beyond this, cord blood and umbilical cord-derived stem cells have demonstrated potential for pluripotent lineage differentiation (liver, pancreatic, neural tissues and more) in vitro and in vivo. This promising research has opened up a new era for utilization of neonatal stem cells, now used beyond haematology in clinical trials for autoimmune disorders, cerebral palsy or type I diabetes.

Liver transplantation for alcohol-related cirrhosis: a single centre long-term clinical and histological follow-up

BACKGROUND

Alcohol-induced liver cirrhosis is one of the leading indications for liver transplantation today. Due to the general organ shortage and continuous deaths on the waiting list there has been some debate on the issue of indication and ethical problems. It was the aim of this study to critically analyse the outcome of patients with alcoholic cirrhosis transplanted at our centre with special emphasis on alcohol-recurrence frequency and long-term histological follow-up.

METHODS

Three hundred five patients who received LT for alcoholic cirrhosis at our institution were followed over a period of 3-10 years after transplantation. Biopsies were taken 1, 3, 5, and 10 years after LT. Specimens were analysed and staged concerning inflammation, rejection, fatty involution, and fibrosis/cirrhosis. Clinical characteristics as well as serological parameters, immunosuppressive protocols, rejection episodes, and patient and graft survival were recorded.

RESULTS

Recurrence of alcohol abuse occurred in 27% of all patients analysed. Regardless of alcohol consumption, 5-year graft and patient survival were excellent; after 10 years abstinent patients showed significantly better survival (82% vs. 68%; P=0.017). Histological changes were slightly more pronounced among recurrent drinkers, no significant difference regarding inflammation or fibrosis was detected.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing LT for alcohol-induced cirrhosis show excellent long-term survival rates with stable graft function. Alcohol recurrence impairs long-term prognosis; however, compared to other patient sub-populations (HCC, HCV) results are clearly above average.

[New-onset diabetes mellitus and liver transplantation, with special consideration of recurrent hepatitis C]

New-onset diabetes is a common complication after liver transplantation.

AIM

We aimed to analyze the incidence and rate of known risk factors and the impact of new-onset diabetes mellitus on postoperative outcome.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the files of 310 patients who underwent liver transplantation between 1995 and 2009. Definition of new-onset diabetes included: repeated fasting serum glucose >6.8 mmol/l and/or sustained antidiabetic therapy that was present 3 months after transplantation.

RESULTS

New-onset diabetes occurred in 63 patients (20%). Differences between the new-onset and the control group were the donor body mass index (24+/-3 vs. 22.4+/-3.6 kg/m 2 , p = 0.003), donor male gender (58% vs. 33%, p = 0.002), and recipient age (47.6+/-7.2 vs. 38.3+/-14.6 year, p<0.001), body mass index (26.7+/-3.8 vs. 23.3+/-5.6 kg/m 2 , p<0.001), male gender (60% vs. 44%, p = 0.031). The 66% of patients with new-onset diabetes were transplanted with cirrhosis caused by hepatitis C virus infection, while in the control group the rate was 23% (p<0.001). Cumulative patient survival rates at 1, 3, 5 and 8 year were 95%, 90.6%, 88% and 88% in the control group, and 87%, 79%, 79% and 64% in the de novo group, respectively (p = 0.011). Cumulative graft survival rates at 1, 3, 5 and 8 year in the control group were 92%, 87%, 86% and 79%, in the de novo diabetes group the rates were 87%, 79%, 79%, 65%, respectively (p = NS). In case of early recurrence (in 6 months), majority of patients developed new-onset diabetes (74% vs. control 26%, p = 0.03). More patients had more than 10 times higher increase of the postoperative virus titer correlate to the preoperative titer in the de novo diabetes group (53% vs. 20%, p = 0.028). Mean fibrosis score was higher in new-onset group one year after the beginning of antiviral therapy (2.05+/-1.53 vs. 1.00+/-1.08, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for new-onset diabetes after transplantation are older age, obesity, male gender and cirrhosis due to hepatitis C infection. The early recurrence, viremia and more severe fibrosis after antiviral therapy have an impact on the occurrence of new-onset diabetes in hepatitis C positive patients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma--what's new?

The increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has led several countries to standardize and update its management. This review aims at summarizing these evolutions through six questions focusing on diagnosis and treatment. The radiological diagnosis of this tumor has been refined. Besides being hypervascular at the arterial phase, the "washout" in particular at the late phase of injection has become a prominent feature. Although routine ultrasound remains the corner stone of screening, contrast ultrasound has become a very reliable characterization tool as it allows continuous monitoring of the vascular kinetics. Biopsy of the tumor allows identification of conventional or molecular prognosis features, some of which could be used in current practice. The metabolic syndrome is an increasing etiology of HCC and carcinogenesis in this context may not always require the development of formal underlying cirrhosis. Associated (in particular cardiovascular) conditions account for an increased morbidity-mortality following surgery. Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment of early-stage tumors. The limited availability of grafts has led some countries including France to implement new allocation rules that are still evaluated and might need to be refined. Sorafenib is the first medical treatment shown to be effective in the treatment of HCC. This efficacy is however still limited and its indication is therefore restricted to Child-Pugh A, OMS 0-2 patients in whom a potentially curative treatment is contraindicated.

The role of marginal donors in liver transplantation. The Hungarian experience

A májátültetések számát korlátozza a beültetésre alkalmas donorszervek mennyisége. A szervhiány megoldására az egyik lehetőség az úgynevezett marginális donorok (extended donor criteria) elfogadása a májátültetési programban. Célkitűzés: A magyar májátültetési program szervdonációs jellemzőinek vizsgálata, különös tekintettel a marginális donorokra. Módszer: Donor- és recipiensadatok retrospektív feldolgozása 2003. január és 2008. december között. A marginálisdonor-kritériumrendszert nemzetközi ajánlások alapján állítottuk fel. Eredmények: A vizsgált periódus alatt összesen 1078 donort jelentettek a klinikán. Nyolcszázharmincöt esetben (77,4%) alkalmatlannak ítélték a donormájat a transzplantációra, 243 esetben (22,6%) volt beültetésre alkalmas a donormáj. A beültetett májgraftok közül 40 (16%) származott marginális, 203 (84%) nem marginális donorból. Marginális májgraftok beültetése esetén nem volt különbség a beteg- és grafttúlélésben, a posztoperatív graftfunkciót jelző paraméterekben és az általános szövődmények gyakoriságában. A korai hepatitis C-rekurrencia gyakoribb volt marginális graft beültetése esetén. Következtetések: A májátültetésre váró betegek száma hazánkban is folyamatosan növekszik. Marginális májgraftok alkalmazása esetén a betegek morbiditása és mortalitása nem különbözik számottevően a standard donorokból származó májgraftok beültetése után tapasztalt eredményektől. Hepatitis C-vírus esetén nem javasolt marginális májgraft beültetése. A donorok felső életkori határának kiterjesztése megfontolandó.

Is positive end-expiratory pressure suitable for liver recipients with a rescue organ offer?

PURPOSE

Rescue organ offers may help to overcome the organ shortage. However, because of initial poor liver function, the recipient may develop a severe lung injury with the requirement for higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels to achieve adequate oxygenation. Positive end-expiratory pressure has been associated with perfusion impairment in the hepatosplanchnic area. We assessed the effects of increased PEEP levels on systemic hemodynamic and liver perfusion in liver transplantation (LT) patients with a rescue organ.

METHODS

Twenty-four LT recipients of a rescue organ offer were enrolled. All patients were postoperatively mechanically ventilated with biphasic positive airway pressure, and 3 different PEEP levels (0, 5, 10 mbar) were randomly set within 4 hours after admission at the intensive care unit. Systemic hemodynamic parameters were recorded using a pulmonary artery catheter; and flow velocities of the hepatic artery, portal vein, and right hepatic vein were measured using Doppler.

RESULTS

Positive end-expiratory pressure of 10 mbar did not impair the systemic hemodynamic. Flow velocities in the right hepatic vein, the portal vein, and the hepatic artery were not influenced by PEEP.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that PEEP up to 10 mbar did not impair the liver outflow in recipients with a rescue organ offer.

Recipient age affects long-term outcome and hepatitis C recurrence in old donor livers following transplantation

We studied the role of donor and recipient age in transplantation/ischemia-reperfusion injury (TIRI) and short- and long-term graft and patient survival. Eight hundred twenty-two patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation, with 197 donors being > or = 60 years old. We evaluated markers of reperfusion injury, graft function, and clinical outcomes as well as short- and long-term graft and patient survival. Increased donor age was associated with more severe TIRI and decreased 3- and 5-year graft survival (73% versus 85% and 72% versus 81%, P < 0.001) and patient survival (77% versus 88% and 77% versus 82%, P < 0.003). Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and recipient age were the only independent risk factors for graft and patient survival in patients receiving an older graft. In the HCV(+) cohort (297 patients), patients > or = 50 years old who were transplanted with an older graft versus a younger graft had significantly decreased 3- and 5-year graft survival (68% versus 83% and 64% versus 83%, P < 0.009). In contrast, HCV(+) patients < 50 years old had similar 3- and 5-year graft survival if transplanted with either a young graft or an old graft (81% versus 82% and 81% versus 82%, P = 0.9). In conclusion, recipient age and HCV status affect the graft and patient survival of older livers. Combining older grafts with older recipients should be avoided, particularly in HCV(+) patients, whereas the effects of donor age can be minimized in younger recipients.

Regeneration and repair: new findings in stem cell research and aging

When it comes to the capacity to regenerate damaged parts of the body, humans are by no means the most advanced among animal species. At the level of single cell populations, humans do exhibit some degree of regenerative potential--for example, hepatocytes have the ability to restore up to 75% of a surgically removed or damaged liver. However, as every schoolchild knows, salamanders and starfish can regrow entire amputated appendages, a remarkable feat well beyond the scope of human capacity. Accordingly, the standing consensus position of the scientific community has deemed mammals fundamentally and unalterably different from those more "primitive" yet regeneration-competent species. Current approaches for the restoration of organ function in humans have therefore been limited to allogeneic organ or cell transplantation--strategies that, while effective, nonetheless exhibit major limitations based on availability of donor tissues and the risk of rejection unless extensive immunosuppression is induced.

Aging and liver regeneration

The loss of regenerative capacity is the most dramatic age-associated alteration in the liver. Although this phenomenon was reported over 50 years ago, the molecular basis for the loss of regenerative capacity of aged livers has not been fully elucidated. Aging causes alterations of several signal-transduction pathways and changes in the expression of CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein (C/EBP) and chromatin-remodeling proteins. Consequently, aging livers accumulate a multi-protein C/EBPalpha-Brm-HDAC1 complex that occupies and silences E2F-dependent promoters, reducing the regenerative capacity of livers in older mice. Recent studies have provided evidence for the crucial role of epigenetic silencing in the age-dependent inhibition of liver proliferation. This review focuses on mechanisms of age-dependent inhibition of liver proliferation and approaches for correcting liver regeneration in the elderly.

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.

Liver transplantations with donors aged 60 years and above: the low liver damage strategy

According to transplant registries, grafts from elderly donors have lower survival rates. During 1999-2005, we evaluated the outcomes of 89 patients who received a liver from a donor aged > or = 60 years and managed with the low liver-damage strategy (LLDS), based on the preoperative donor liver biopsy and the shortest possible ischemia time (group D > or = 60-LLDS). Group D > or = 60-LLDS was compared with 198 matched recipients, whose grafts were not managed with this strategy (89 donors < 60 years, group D < 60-no-LLDS and 89 donors aged > or =60 years, group D > or = 60-no-LLDS). In the donors proposed from the age group of > or =60 years, the number of donors rejected decreased during the study period and the LLDS was found to be responsible for this in a significant manner (47% vs. 60%, respectively P < 0.01). Among the recipients transplanted, the clinical features (age, gender, viral infection, child and model for end-stage liver disease score) were comparable among groups, but group D > or = 60-LLDS had a lower mean ischemia time: 415 +/- 106 min vs. 465 +/- 111 (D < 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05 and vs. 476 +/- 94 (D > or = 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05. After a median follow-up of 3 years, the 1- and 3-year graft survival rates of group D > or = 60-LLDS (84% and 76%) were comparable with group D < 60-no-LLDS (89% and 76%) and were significantly higher than group D > or = 60-no-LLDS (71% and 54%), P < 0.005. In conclusion, the LLDS optimized the use of livers from elderly donors.

The role of immunomodulation in ABO-incompatible adult liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

ABO-incompatible (ABO-i) liver transplantation (LT) is a high-risk procedure due to the potential for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and cell-mediated rejection. The aim of the current report is to illustrate the results of a retrospective comparison study on the use of immunomodulation with therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) associated to high-dose immunoglobulins (IVIg) and extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) in ABO-i adult LT patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 1996 and December 2005, 19 patients underwent ABO-i LT. The study was designed for a comparison between two groups of ABO-i LT. Group 1 (control group) consisted of 11 patients treated with TPE only. Group 2 (study group) included eight patients treated with TPE and IVIg. Moreover, all Group 2 patients received acute rejection prophylaxis with ECP.

RESULTS

The graft survival at 6, 12, and 18 months was 63.6, 54.4, and 45.5% for Group 1 vs. 87.5, 87.5, and 87.5% for Group 2 (P < or = 0.001). In Group 1 there were 3(27.3%) cases of AMR; 5 (45.4%) biopsy-proven acute rejections (BPAR); 1 (9.1%) chronic rejection and 3 (27.3%) ischemic-type biliary lesions (ITBL). In Group 2 there were no cases of AMR, BPAR, chronic rejection, or ITBL (P = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

At median follow-up of 568 days, TPE in combination with IVIg and ECP appears to protect the graft from AMR in ABO-i liver transplantation. Continued patient enrollment will allow validation of these preliminary observations or the opportunity to devise newer AMR-avoidance policies.

Improving the outcome of liver transplantation with very old donors with updated selection and management criteria

Advanced donor age is a risk factor for poor outcome in liver transplantation (LT). We reviewed 553 consecutive transplants according to donor age categories [group 1 (n = 173): <50 years; group 2 (n = 96): 50-59 years; group 3 (n = 132): 60-69 years; group 4 (n = 111): 70-79 years; group 5 (n = 41): > or =80 years]. Clinical parameters were comparable between groups. Group 5 had the highest proportion of pretransplant liver biopsy (85%), with only 1 graft showing macrovesicular steatosis > 30%, and the lowest ischemia time. Five-year graft survival was significantly higher in group 1 (75%) versus groups 3 (60%) and 4 (62%; P = 0.01 and P = 0.001, respectively) and in group 5 (81%) versus groups 3 and 4 (P = 0.04 and P = 0.01, respectively). Donor age of 60-79 years, recipient hepatitis C virus-positive status, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score > or = 25, and emergency LT were predictors of poor survival. In hepatitis C virus-positive patients, 5-year graft survival was 72% in group 1, 85% in group 2, 52% in group 3, 65% in group 4, and 71% in group 5 (group 1 versus group 3, P = 0.04; group 2 versus group 3, P = 0.03). In conclusion, older donor grafts managed with routine graft biopsy and short ischemia time may work effectively, regardless of the severity of the recipient's liver disease.

The cumulative effects of cold ischemic time and older donor age on liver graft survival

INTRODUCTION

To provide greater equity among those awaiting a liver transplant, expanded geographic sharing of cadaveric organs has been proposed. A potential unintended consequence could be an increase in cold ischemia time (CIT), which may be deleterious to organs from older donors. This study sought to quantify the relative risk (RR) associated with increased CIT among older donors.

METHODS

A retrospective study examining 18,787 liver transplants within the United Network for Organ Sharing database from 2002 to 2006 was performed. Cox Regression analysis was used to model the RR of graft loss with respect to increased CIT among older donors (>60 years) relative to younger donors (<60 years), while controlling for multiple donor and recipient characteristics.

RESULTS

Relative to younger donors with minimal CIT (<6 h), a 73.0% increase in the risk of graft loss was observed for older donors with a CIT between 8 and 10 h, a 56.9% increase for CIT between 10 and 12 h, and a 92.7% increase for a CIT of 12 or more hours. Additionally, the RR of graft loss for older donors with minimal CIT (<6 h) was greater than the RR for younger donors with a CIT between 0 and 12 h.

CONCLUSION

The additive effects of increased donor age and cold ischemic time greatly impair graft survival. Quantification of the adverse nature of increasing CIT as a potential consequence of wider geographic organ sharing should be considered as allocation policies are modified to improve recipient equity in the face of an aging donor pool.

Minimizing risk associated with elderly liver donors by matching to preferred recipients

Elderly liver donors (ELDs) represent a possible expansion of the donor pool, although there is great reluctance to use ELDs because of reports that increasing donor age predicts graft loss and patient death. The goal of this study was to identify a subgroup of recipients who would be least affected by increased donor age and thus best suited to receive grafts from ELDs. A national registry of deceased donor liver transplants from 2002-2005 was analyzed. ELDs aged 70-92 (n = 1043) were compared with average liver donors (ALDs) aged 18-69 (n = 15,878) and ideal liver donors (ILDs) aged 18-39 (n = 6842). Recipient factors that modified the effect of donor age on outcomes were identified via interaction term analysis. Outcomes in recipient subgroups were compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Recipients preferred for ELD transplants were determined to be first-time recipients over the age of 45 with body mass index <35, non-status 1 registration, cold ischemic time <8 hours, and either hepatocellular carcinoma or an indication for transplantation other than hepatitis C. In preferred recipients, there were no differences in outcomes when ELD livers were used (3-year graft survival: ELD 75%, ALD 75%, ILD 77%, P > 0.1; 3-year patient survival: ELD 81%, ALD 80%, ILD 81%, P > 0.1). In contrast, there were significantly worse outcomes when ELD livers were used in nonpreferred recipients (3-year graft survival: ELD 50%, ALD 71%, ILD 75%, P < 0.001; 3-year patient survival: ELD 64%, ALD 77%, ILD 80%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The risks of ELDs can be substantially minimized by appropriate recipient selection.

Acute renal failure after liver transplantation in MELD era

Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was used in our center from 2003 to assess the position of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) candidates on a waiting list. A key component of MELD score in the assessment of the degree of the illness is renal function. In this study, we measured the effects of this new scoring system on renal function and therapeutic strategies. We evaluated the incidence of acute renal function (ARF) after OLT requiring renal replacement therapy (hemofiltration or hemodialysis) in two patient groups: 240 transplanted before MELD era and 224 after the introduction of this parameter to select candidates. ARF occurred in 8.3% of patients in the pre-MELD group versus 13% in the MELD group, while the mortality rates were 40% and 27%, respectively. The creatinine level before OLT seemed to be a good predictor of ARF (P < .001), and blood transfusion rates (P < .05) as well as intraoperative diuresis (P < .05). In our analysis we did not observe a correlation between MELD score and postoperative ARF.

Older donor livers show early severe histological activity, fibrosis, and graft failure after liver transplantation for hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

In hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive liver transplant recipients, infection of the allograft and recurrent liver disease are important problems. Increased donor age has emerged as an important variable affecting patient and graft survival; however, specific age cutoffs and risk ratios for poor histologic outcomes and graft survival are not clear.

METHODS

A longitudinal database of all HCV-positive patients transplanted at our center during an 11-year period was used to identify 111 patients who received 124 liver transplants. Graft survival and histological endpoints (severe activity and fibrosis) of HCV infection in the allografts were compared as a function of donor age at transplantation.

RESULTS

By Kaplan-Meier analyses, older allografts showed earlier failure and decreased time to severe histological activity and fibrosis as compared with allografts from younger donors. By Cox proportional hazards analysis, older allografts were at greater risk for all severe histologic features and decreased graft survival as compared with younger allografts (P< or =0.02 for all outcomes). Analysis of donor age as a dichotomous variable showed that donors greater than 60 yr were at high risk for deleterious histologic outcomes and graft failure. An age cutoff of 60 yr showed a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 67% for worse graft survival by receiver operating characteristics curve.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced donor age is associated with more aggressive recurrent HCV and early allograft failure in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients. Consideration of donor age is important for decisions regarding patient selection, antiviral therapy, and organ allocation.

Impact of age older than 60 years in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was extended to adults in recent years and more recently to older patients. The impact of donor age, analysis of preoperative risk factors for older LDLT recipients, and comparison of the complication rate between older and younger recipients were analyzed.

METHODS

Subjects included patients who underwent LDLT at Kyoto University Hospital from October 1996 to December 2005. Twenty-three donors were 60 years of age or older, and 411 were younger than 60 years of age. Fifty-two recipients were 60 years of age or older and 410 were younger than 60 years of age.

RESULTS

Postoperative recovery of liver function for donors and recipient/graft survival were not influenced by donor age. Hospital stay was longer in the donors 60 years of age or older than those younger than 60 years of age (P=0.02). The 5-year survival rates were 78.7% in recipients 60 years of age or older and 69.3% in younger recipients (P=0.26). Among preoperative risk factors for recipient survival rate, fulminant hepatic failure and preoperative status in the intensive care unit were significant (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications for recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected right lobe donors from individuals who were 60 years of age or older showed a similar postoperative course compared with younger donors. Moreover, LDLT is feasible for patients 60 years of age or older who do not require care in the intensive care unit or do not have fulminant hepatic failure.

Selective use of older adults in right lobe living donor liver transplantation

Many centers are reluctant to use older donors (>44 years) for adult right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) due to concerns about possible increased morbidity in donors and poorer outcomes in recipients. Since 2000, 130 adult RLDLTs have been performed at our institution. Recipients were divided into those who received a right lobe graft from a donor </=age 44 (n = 89, 68%; median age 30) and those who received a liver graft from a donor age >44 (n = 41, 32%; mean age 52). The two donor and recipient populations had similar demographic and operative profiles. With a median follow-up of 29 months, the severity and number of complications in older donors were similar to those in younger donors. No living donor died. Older donor allografts had initial allograft dysfunction compared to younger donors. Complication rates were similar among recipients in both groups but there was a higher bile duct stricture rate with older donor grafts (27% vs. 12%; p = 0.04). One-year recipient graft survival was 86% for older donors and 85% for younger donors (p = 0.95). Early experience with the use of selected older adults (>44 years) for RLDLT is encouraging, but may be associated with a higher rate of biliary complications in the recipient.