Outcomes of 385 adult-to-adult living donor liver transplant recipients: a report from the A2ALL Consortium

Incidence and severity of acute cellular rejection in recipients undergoing adult living donor or deceased donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may have better immunological outcomes compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence of acute cellular rejection (ACR) after LDLT and DDLT. Data from the adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (A2ALL) retrospective cohort study on 593 liver transplants done between May 1998 and March 2004 were studied (380 LDLT; 213 DDLT). Median LDLT and DDLT follow-up was 778 and 713 days, respectively. Rates of clinically treated and biopsy-proven ACR were compared. There were 174 (46%) LDLT and 80 (38%) DDLT recipients with >/=1 clinically treated episodes of ACR, whereas 103 (27%) LDLT and 58 (27%) DDLT recipients had >/=1 biopsy-proven ACR episode. A higher proportion of LDLT recipients had clinically treated ACR (p = 0.052), but this difference was largely attributable to one center. There were similar proportions of biopsy-proven rejection (p = 0.97) and graft loss due to rejection (p = 0.16). Longer cold ischemia time was associated with a higher rate of ACR in both groups despite much shorter median cold ischemia time in LDLT. These data do not show an immunological advantage for LDLT, and therefore do not support the application of unique posttransplant immunosuppression protocols for LDLT recipients.

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.

Recipient morbidity after living and deceased donor liver transplantation: findings from the A2ALL Retrospective Cohort Study

Patients considering living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) need to know the risk and severity of complications compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). One aim of the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) was to examine recipient complications following these procedures. Medical records of DDLT or LDLT recipients who had a living donor evaluated at the nine A2ALL centers between 1998 and 2003 were reviewed. Among 384 LDLT and 216 DDLT, at least one complication occurred after 82.8% of LDLT and 78.2% of DDLT (p = 0.17). There was a median of two complications after DDLT and three after LDLT. Complications that occurred at a higher rate (p < 0.05) after LDLT included biliary leak (31.8% vs. 10.2%), unplanned reexploration (26.2% vs. 17.1%), hepatic artery thrombosis (6.5% vs. 2.3%) and portal vein thrombosis (2.9% vs. 0.0%). There were more complications leading to retransplantation or death (Clavien grade 4) after LDLT versus DDLT (15.9% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.023). Many complications occurred more commonly during early center experience; the odds of grade 4 complications were more than two-fold higher when centers had performed <or=20 LDLT (vs. >40). In summary, complication rates were higher after LDLT versus DDLT, but declined with center experience to levels comparable to DDLT.

Postoperative infectious complications of abdominal solid organ transplantation

There is a rapidly growing population of immunocompromised organ transplant recipients. These patients are at risk of a large variety of infections that have significant consequences on mortality, graft dysfunction, and graft loss. The diagnosis and treatment of these infections are facilitated by an understanding of the preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative risk factors; the typical pathogens; and their characteristic time of presentation. On the basis of these factors, we put forth an algorithm for diagnosing and treating suspected infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

Live donor adult liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Because the gap between liver organ supply and demand continues to increase, adult living-donor liver transplantation continues to represent a significant pool of organs.

RECENT FINDINGS

With this in mind, we discuss recent issues in adult living-donor liver transplantation, including issues with donor evaluation and selection, donor liver biopsy, orphan organ allocation, donor morbidity and mortality, outcomes compared with deceased donor liver transplant from time of evaluation, death on the waiting list, and evolving recipient indications for living-donor liver transplantation.

SUMMARY

Increasing the number of living-donor liver transplants would allow us to expedite transplant, avoid death on the waitlist, and possibly save more lives by expanding the criteria for transplant. These benefits must always be weighed against the potential risks and complications to the donor, which can be significant.

High volume and outcome after liver resection: surgeon or center?

INTRODUCTION

In a case controlled analysis, we attempted to determine if the volume-survival benefit persists in liver resection (LR) after eliminating differences in background characteristics.

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), we identified all LR (n = 2,949) with available surgeon/hospital identifiers performed from 1998-2005. Propensity scoring adjusted for background characteristics. Volume cut-points were selected to create equal groups. A logistic regression for mortality was then performed with these matched groups.

RESULTS

At high volume (HV) hospitals, patients (n = 1423) were more often older, white, private insurance holders, elective admissions, carriers of a malignant diagnosis, and high income residents (p < 0.05). Propensity matching eliminated differences in background characteristics. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the HV group (2.6% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.02). Logistic regression found that private insurance and elective admission type decreased mortality; preoperative comorbidity increased mortality. Only LR performed by HV surgeons at HV centers was independently associated with improved in-hospital mortality (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

A socioeconomic bias may exist at HV centers. When these factors are accounted for and adjusted, center volume does not appear to influence in-hospital mortality unless LR is performed by HV surgeons at HV centers.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection after living-donor liver transplantation in adults

OBJECTIVES

Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection is a major cause of bacterial infection after deceased-donor liver transplantation. The incidence and risk factors of P. aeruginosa infection after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT), however, are not known.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data from 170 adult patients who underwent LDLT at the University of Tokyo Hospital. The microbiologic and medical records of the patients from admission to 3 months after LDLT were reviewed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the independent risk factors for postoperative P. aeruginosa infection.

RESULT

Preoperative P. aeruginosa carriage was identified in 15 (9%) patients. Only 2 of the 15 patients later presented with postoperative P. aeruginosa infection. Postoperative P. aeruginosa infection occurred in 27 (16%) of 170 patients by median postoperative day 38. Among those 27 patients, surgical site infections were recorded in 8 (30%) and intra-abdominal infections in 14 (52%). In 5 of the 27 (19%) patients, P. aeruginosa isolates were multiple antimicrobial resistant. Postoperative bile leakage independently predicted postoperative P. aeruginosa infection.

CONCLUSION

P. aeruginosa infections were frequently detected after LDLT, including those by multiple antimicrobial-resistant isolates. Postoperative bile leakage predisposed patients to P. aeruginosa infection. Surveillance culture should be checked periodically after LDLT to ensure that appropriate antimicrobials can be administered for postoperative infection.

Psychosocial factors in living organ donation: clinical and ethical challenges

Living donor surgery has come to the forefront of public attention because increasing numbers of potential donors respond to the organ shortage. Because of several factors including decreased morbidity from donor surgery, online resources appealing for organs, and increased publicity about donation, new populations of unrelated donors are seeking evaluation for donor surgery. However, concern about potential coercion of vulnerable individuals, the potential for adverse psychosocial outcomes, and recent reports of donor deaths have reinvigorated discussion within the medical community about how best to assess donors. Research on the long-term quality of life outcomes for donors suggests that most donors are satisfied with their decision to donate. Small single-center studies on psychosocial outcomes have reported psychiatric sequelae after donor surgery. Little is known about the psychosocial outcomes for donors who are psychosocially excluded from donating. A multidisciplinary team approach, including social work and psychiatry evaluations, allows for the comprehensive assessment of important areas including motivation and expectations about surgery, current and past psychiatric conditions, history of substance or alcohol abuse, family support, understanding of the risks and alternatives of donor surgery for the donor and recipient, and motivation for donation including any evidence of coercion.

Critical care management of the liver transplant recipient

Liver transplantation is an acceptable treatment modality for complications of end-stage liver disease from chronic and acute liver failure. In the United States, 16 377 people are currently awaiting liver transplant but only 6492 transplantations were performed in 2007. All options for liver transplantation including Model for End stage Liver Disease allocated, expanded criteria deceased donors, and live donor liver transplantation should be discussed with potential recipients on the waitlist to create an early access plan for safe and expeditious transplantation. After transplantation, careful management to avoid complications and intervene early is necessary. Common postoperative complications include graft dysfunction, vascular thrombosis, biliary tract complications, infection, rejection, neurologic injury, electrolyte imbalances, and drug interactions. A multidisciplinary approach to care including the critical care nurse is necessary for successful long-term outcomes.

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.

Donor morbidity after living donation for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Reports of complications among adult right hepatic lobe donors have been limited to single centers. The rate and severity of complications in living donors were investigated in the 9-center Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study design was used. Participants included all potential living donors evaluated between 1998 and 2003. Complication severity was graded using the Clavien scoring system.

RESULTS

Of 405 donors accepted for donation, 393 underwent donation, and 12 procedures were aborted. There were 245 donors (62%) who did not experience complications; 82 (21%) had 1 complication, and 66 (17%) had 2 or more. Complications were scored as grade 1 (minor; n = 106, 27%), grade 2 (potentially life threatening; n = 103, 26%), grade 3 (life threatening; n = 8, 2%), and grade 4 (leading to death; n = 3, 0.8%). Common complications included biliary leaks beyond postoperative day 7 (n = 36, 9%), bacterial infections (n = 49, 12%), incisional hernia (n = 22, 6%), pleural effusion requiring intervention (n = 21, 5%), neuropraxia (n = 16, 4%), reexploration (n = 12, 3%), wound infections (n = 12, 3%), and intraabdominal abscess (n = 9, 2%). Two donors developed portal vein thrombosis, and 1 had inferior vena caval thrombosis. Fifty-one (13%) donors required hospital readmission, and 14 (4%) required 2 to 5 readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult living liver donation was associated with significant donor complications. Although most complications were of low-grade severity, a significant proportion were severe or life threatening. Quantification of complication risk may improve the informed consent process, perioperative planning, and donor care.

Use of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score to predict 1-year survival of Japanese patients with cirrhosis and to determine who will benefit from living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Consideration of the prognosis of patients with liver cirrhosis is important when determining the appropriate timing of liver transplantation. Especially in Japan, where 99% of liver transplants are from living donors, timing is very important not only for the patient but also for the family, who need time to consider the various factors involved in living donations.

METHODS

To clarify the applicability of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in Japanese patients with cirrhosis, changes in the MELD score over 24 months were reviewed in 79 patients with cirrhosis who subsequently died of liver failure (n=33) or who survived 24 months (n=46). All patients had Child class B or C cirrhosis at the start of follow-up. We also compared their survival with that of 30 patients treated by living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in our institute to determine the proper timing of transplantation in patients with cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Significant stratification of survival curves was observed for MELD scores of <12, 12-15, 15-18, and >18 (P=0.0018). A significant survival benefit of LDLT was observed in patients with MELD score >or=15 (P=0.0181), and significantly more risk with transplantation was observed in those with MELD score <15 compared with that of patients in whom the disease followed its natural course (P=0.0168).

CONCLUSIONS

MELD score is useful for predicting 1-year survival in Japanese patients with cirrhosis. MELD scores of 15 had discriminatory value for indicating a survival benefit to be gained by liver transplantation and thus can be used to help patients and their families by identifying patients who would benefit from LDLT.

Graft size, donor age, and patient status are the indicators of early graft function after living donor liver transplantation

No reliable model for predicting early graft function and patient survival after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) exists. The aim of this study was to establish a new formula for predicting early graft function and prognosis using technetium-99m galactosyl-human serum albumin (Tc-GSA) liver scintigraphy. The ratio of the hepatic uptake ratio of Tc-GSA to the clearance index of Tc-GSA (LHL/HH) was determined 7 days after LDLT. There were 22 patients with a ratio greater than 1.3 and 6 patients with a ratio less than 1.3. Graft function on the 14th postoperative day (POD) was compared between the 2 groups. A new formula to predict the LHL/HH score was established as follows: LHL/HH (predictive score) = 0.011 x graft weight (%) - 0.016 x donor age - 0.008 x Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score - 0.15 x shunt (if present) + 1.757 (r(2) = 0.497, P < 0.01). This predicted LHL/HH ratio was compared to the graft function on POD 14 for 110 LDLT patients. The total bilirubin (TB) and prothrombin time international normalized ratio (PT-INR) in the group with an LHL/HH score > or = 1.3 were lower than those in the group with an LHL/HH score < 1.3. The TB, PT-INR, and volume of ascites in the group with a predictive score > or = 1.3 (n = 86) were lower than those in the group with a score < 1.3 (n = 24). The 6-month survival probability was improved in the group with a predictive score > or = 1.3. In conclusion, this preoperative calculated LHL/HH score is correlated with graft function and short-term prognosis. Thus, this predictive model may allow transplant surgeons to use a living donor left lobe graft with greater confidence.

Hot topics in liver transplantation: organ allocation--extended criteria donor--living donor liver transplantation

Liver transplantation has become the mainstay for the treatment of end-stage liver disease, hepatocellular cancer and some metabolic disorders. Its main drawback, though, is the disparity between the number of donors and the patients needing a liver graft. In this review we will discuss the recent changes regarding organ allocation, extended donor criteria, living donor liver transplantation and potential room for improvement. The gap between the number of donors and patients needing a liver graft forced the transplant community to introduce an objective model such as the modified model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in order to obtain a transparent and fair organ allocation system. The use of extended criteria donor livers such as organs from older donors or steatotic grafts is one possibility to reduce the gap between patients on the waiting list and available donors. Finally, living donor liver transplantation has become a standard procedure in specialized centers as another possibility to reduce the donor shortage. Recent data clearly indicate that center experience is of major importance in achieving good results. Great progress has been made in recent years. However, further research is needed to improve results in the future.

Analysis of surgical and perioperative complications in seventy-five right hepatectomies for living donor liver transplantation

AIM: To present an analysis of the surgical and perioperative complications in a series of seventy-five right hepatectomies for living-donation (RHLD) performed in our center.

METHODS: From January 2002 to September 2007, we performed 75 RHLD, defined as removal of a portion of the liver corresponding to Couinaud segments 5-8, in order to obtain a graft for adult to adult living-related liver transplantation (ALRLT). Surgical complications were stratified according to the most recent version of the Clavien classification of postoperative surgical complications. The perioperative period was defined as within 90 d of surgery.

RESULTS: No living donor mortality was present in this series, no donor operation was aborted and no donors received any blood transfusion. Twenty-three (30.6%) living donors presented one or more episodes of complication in the perioperative period. Seven patients (9.33%) out of 75 developed biliary complications, which were the most common complications in our series.

CONCLUSION: The need to define, categorize and record complications when healthy individuals, such as living donors, undergo a major surgical procedure, such as a right hepatectomy, reflects the need for prompt and detailed reports of complications arising in this particular category of patient. Perioperative complications and post resection liver regeneration are not influenced by anatomic variations or patient demographic.

Live donors in liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been controversial since its inception. Begun in response to deceased donor organ shortage and waiting list mortality, LDLT was initiated in 1989 in children, grew rapidly after its first general application in adults in the United States in 1998, and has declined since 2001. There are significant risks to the living donor, including the risk of death and substantial morbidity, and 2 highly publicized donor deaths are thought to have contributed to decreased enthusiasm for LDLT. Significant improvements in outcomes have been seen over recent years, and data, including from the National Institutes of Health-funded Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL), have established a survival benefit from pursuing LDLT. Despite this, LDLT still composes less than 5% of adult liver transplants, significantly less than in kidney transplantation where living donors compose approximately 40% of all transplantations performed. The ethics, optimal utility, and application of LDLT remain to be defined. In addition, most studies to date have focused on posttransplantation outcomes and have not included the effect of the learning curve on outcome or the potential impact of LDLT on waiting list mortality. Further growth of LDLT will depend on defining the optimal recipient and donor characteristics for this procedure as well as broader acceptance and experience in the public and in transplant centers.

Solving the organ shortage crisis: the 7th annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons' State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium

The 2007 American Society of Transplant Surgeons' (ASTS) State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium entitled, 'Solving the Organ Shortage Crisis' explored ways to increase the supply of donor organs to meet the challenge of increasing waiting lists and deaths while awaiting transplantation. While the increasing use of organs previously considered marginal, such as those from expanded criteria donors (ECD) or donors after cardiac death (DCD) has increased the number of transplants from deceased donors, these transplants are often associated with inferior outcomes and higher costs. The need remains for innovative ways to increase both deceased and living donor transplants. In addition to increasing ECD and DCD utilization, increasing use of deceased donors with certain types of infections such as Hepatitis B and C, and increasing use of living donor liver, lung and intestinal transplants may also augment the organ supply. The extent by which donors may be offered incentives for donation, and the practical, ethical and legal implications of compensating organ donors were also debated. The expanded use of nonstandard organs raises potential ethical considerations about appropriate recipient selection, informed consent and concerns that the current regulatory environment discourages and penalizes these efforts.

Live donor liver transplantation: current status

The inequality between supply of grafts and demand for transplants has forced the transplant community to devise ways to increase the number of available livers for transplant (ie, through use of extended criteria donor grafts and living donation). Since 2002, the number of live donor liver transplantations (LDLT) performed has declined due to concerns of donor safety and lack of clear outcome data establishing success equivalent to that of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Recent data suggest that LDLT outcomes are comparable with those of DDLT, provided a center has performed more than 20 procedures, both in patients with and without hepatitis C. Further studies are needed to define the optimal donor and the ideal recipient for LDLT. Results from a National Institutes of Health-funded consortium of nine transplant centers are highly anticipated. These data are expected to underscore the viability of LDLT as a life-saving therapy for certain patients with end-stage liver disease.

Historical perspective of living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has gone through its formative years and established as a legitimate treatment when a deceased donor liver graft is not timely or simply not available at all. Nevertheless, LDLT is characterized by its technical complexity and ethical controversy. These are the consequences of a single organ having to serve two subjects, the donor and the recipient, instantaneously. The transplant community has a common ground on assuring donor safety while achieving predictable recipient success. With this background, a reflection of the development of LDLT may be appropriate to direct future research and patient-care efforts on this life-saving treatment alternative.

Biliary complications following liver transplantation in the model for end-stage liver disease era: effect of donor, recipient, and technical factors

Biliary complications remain a significant problem following liver transplantation in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) era. We hypothesized that donor, recipient, and technical variables may differentially affect anastomotic biliary complications in MELD era liver transplants. We reviewed 256 deceased donor liver transplants after the institution of MELD at our center and evaluated these variables' association with anastomotic biliary complications. The bile leak rate was 18%, and the stricture rate was 23%. Univariate analysis revealed that recipient age, MELD, donor age, and warm ischemia were risk factors for leak, whereas a Roux limb or stent was protective. A bile leak was a risk factor for anastomotic stricture, whereas use of histidine tryptophan ketoglutarate (HTK) versus University of Wisconsin (UW) solution was protective. Additionally, use of a transcystic tube/stent was also protective. Multivariate analysis showed that warm ischemia was the only independent risk factor for a leak, whereas development of a leak was the only independent risk factor for a stricture. HTK versus UW use and transcystic tube/stent use were the only independent protective factors against stricture. Use of an internal stent trended in the multivariate analysis toward being protective against leaks and strictures, but this was not quite statistically significant. This represents one of the first MELD era studies of deceased donor liver transplants evaluating factors affecting the incidence of anastomotic bile leaks and strictures. Donor, recipient, and technical factors appear to differentially affect the incidence of anastomotic biliary complications, with warm ischemia, use of HTK, and use of a stent emerging as the most important variables.

Improvement in survival associated with adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

More than 2000 adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantations (LDLT) have been performed in the United States, yet the potential benefit to liver transplant candidates of undergoing LDLT compared with waiting for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a survival benefit of adult LDLT.

METHODS

Adults with chronic liver disease who had a potential living donor evaluated from January 1998 to February 2003 at 9 university-based hospitals were analyzed. Starting at the time of a potential donor's evaluation, we compared mortality after LDLT to mortality among those who remained on the waiting list or received DDLT. Median follow-up was 4.4 years. Comparisons were made by hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for LDLT candidate characteristics at the time of donor evaluation.

RESULTS

Among 807 potential living donor recipients, 389 underwent LDLT, 249 underwent DDLT, 99 died without transplantation, and 70 were awaiting transplantation at last follow-up. Receipt of LDLT was associated with an adjusted mortality HR of 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.74; P < .001) relative to candidates who did not undergo LDLT. As centers gained greater experience (>20 LDLT), LDLT benefit was magnified, with a mortality HR of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.23-0.53; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adult LDLT was associated with lower mortality than the alternative of waiting for DDLT. This reduction in mortality was magnified as centers gained experience with LDLT. This reduction in transplant candidate mortality must be balanced against the risks undertaken by the living donors themselves.

Current concepts in the evaluation of patients for liver transplantation

Candidates for liver transplantation undergo a thorough medical, surgical, psychosocial and financial evaluation prior to listing for transplantation. Prioritization for allocating livers is based upon the model for end-stage liver disease score and waiting-time mortality with the fundamental concept of giving organs to the sickest first. In the upcoming years the allocation system may be modified to include other factors associated with mortality, such as serum sodium, and may incorporate both pre- and post-transplant mortality. Strategies to expand the donor pool include utilizing livers from donors after cardiac death, split liver transplantation and living donor liver transplantation. Future challenges for liver transplantation will include the obesity epidemic and the prevention and treatment of recurrent disease, particularly hepatitis C.

Outcomes of donor evaluation in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

The purpose of donor evaluation for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is to discover medical conditions that could increase the donor postoperative risk of complications and to determine whether the donor can yield a suitable graft for the recipient. We report the outcomes of LDLT donor candidates evaluated in a large multicenter study of LDLT. The records of all donor candidates and their respective recipients between 1998 and 2003 were reviewed as part of the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). The outcomes of the evaluation were recorded along with demographic data on the donors and recipients. Of the 1011 donor candidates evaluated, 405 (40%) were accepted for donation. The donor characteristics associated with acceptance (P < 0.05) were younger age, lower body mass index, and biological or spousal relationship to the recipient. Recipient characteristics associated with donor acceptance were younger age, lower Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, and shorter time from listing to first donor evaluation. Other predictors of donor acceptance included earlier year of evaluation and transplant center.

CONCLUSION

Both donor and recipient features appear to affect acceptance for LDLT. These findings may aid the donor evaluation process and allow an objective assessment of the likelihood of donor candidate acceptance.

Intercontinental comparison of patient cohorts: what can we learn from it?

Survival after liver transplantation in the United Kingdom and Ireland compared with the United States

Long-term analysis of primary nonfunction in liver transplant recipients

Long-term allograft and patient survival following liver transplantation continues to improve with the development of new surgical techniques and immunosuppressive agents. Complications such as primary nonfunction (PNF) have not been well characterized in terms of long-term allograft and patient survival. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of PNF in liver transplant recipients and patient and graft survival, in addition to identifying temporal trends in these parameters.

METHOD

Data were obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplant Network for all adults (>18 years old) who received a deceased donor liver transplant between January 1990 and December 2004.

RESULTS

Of the 58,576 liver transplant recipients, 2061 had PNF, an overall incidence of 3.5%. There was a 30% annual increase in the incidence of PNF between 1990 and 2000; the incidence of PNF peaked at 7%, and then decreased by 20% annually thereafter. No differences in donor and perioperative variables were identified to account for this variation. One-, 3-, and 5-year patient and graft survival for patients with PNF who underwent retransplant were significantly lower than those with primary liver transplant. In conclusion, there has been decreased incidence of PNF among liver transplant recipients in the last decade.

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.

Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Singapore: The Asian Centre for Liver Diseases and Transplantation Experience

Introduction: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has progressed dramatically in Asia due to the scarcity of cadaver donors and is increasingly performed in Singapore. The authors present their experience with adult LDLT. Materials and Methods: Adult LDLTs performed at the Asian Centre for Liver Diseases and Transplantation, Singapore from 20 April 2002 until 20 March 2006 were reviewed. All patients received right lobe grafts and were managed by the same team throughout this period. Data were obtained by chart review. This study presents both recipient and donor outcomes in a single centre. Results: A total of 65 patients underwent LDLT. Forty-three were genetically related while 22 were from emotionally-related donors. The majority were chronic liver failure while 14% were acute. The most common indication for LDLT was end-stage liver disease due to hepatitis B virus. A total of 22 patients with hepatoma were transplanted and overall 1-year disease specific survival was 94.4%. The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 17.4 ± 9.4 (range, 6 to 40). Six patients had preoperative molecular adsorbent recycling system (MARS) dialysis with 83% transplant success rate. The mean follow-up was 479.2 days with a median of 356 days. One-year overall survival was 80.5%. There was 1 donor mortality and morbidity rate was 17%. Our series is in its early stage with good perioperative survival outcome with 1-month and 3-month actuarial survival rates of 95.4% and 87.3% respectively. Conclusion: The study demonstrates that LDLT can be done safely with good results for a variety of liver diseases. However, with dynamically evolving criteria and management strategies, further studies are needed to maximise treatment outcome. Key words: Donor and recipient outcome, End-stage liver disease, Hepatitis, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Living donor liver transplantation

Psychological strain in urgent indications for living donor liver transplantation

The ethical soundness of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in urgent indications is still under discussion. The aim of the survey was to investigate the psychological distress of donors in cases of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or acute liver failure (ALF). In a prospective multicenter study (n = 123), health-related quality of life (QOL), anxiety, and depression were measured. The psychological distress of donors was correlated to the degree of urgency of the recipients' indication, which was classified as nonurgent, HCC, or ALF. During the donor evaluation prior to LDLT, the donors with recipients for HCC and ALF demonstrated significantly reduced mental QOL in comparison to donors for a nonurgent indication and to the German normative sample. Compared to healthy controls, anxiety and depression were significantly increased in donors for ALF. Three months after the transplantation, scores for mental QOL as well as for anxiety and depression improved and were within the normal range for the whole group as well as for the ALF donors. In conclusion, the psychological burden was temporary in nature. Our findings can be considered as arguments for the current practice to address family members as donors in cases of HCC and ALF.

Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence and death following living and deceased donor liver transplantation

We examined mortality and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among 106 transplant candidates with cirrhosis and HCC who had a potential living donor evaluated between January 1998 and February 2003 at the nine centers participating in the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). Cox regression models were fitted to compare time from donor evaluation and time from transplant to death or HCC recurrence between 58 living donor liver transplant (LDLT) and 34 deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) recipients. Mean age and calculated Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores at transplant were similar between LDLT and DDLT recipients (age: 55 vs. 52 years, p = 0.21; MELD: 13 vs. 15, p = 0.08). Relative to DDLT recipients, LDLT recipients had a shorter time from listing to transplant (mean 160 vs. 469 days, p < 0.0001) and a higher rate of HCC recurrence within 3 years than DDLT recipients (29% vs. 0%, p = 0.002), but there was no difference in mortality or the combined outcome of mortality or recurrence. LDLT recipients had lower relative mortality risk than patients who did not undergo LDLT after the center had more experience (p = 0.03). Enthusiasm for LDLT as HCC treatment is dampened by higher HCC recurrence compared to DDLT.

Expanding donor options: marginal, living, and split donors

One of the most important factors in the increasing number of liver transplantations performed in the United States is the growing acceptance of marginal grafts, which are defined as organs at increased risk for poor function or failure that may subject the recipient to greater risks of morbidity or mortality. Based on encouraging results, a growing number of liver transplantation centers are broadening their criteria for transplantation of marginal grafts. This article discusses the use of the extended criteria donor liver, split-liver, and living-donor liver transplantation.

Waitlist mortality decreases with increased use of extended criteria donor liver grafts at adult liver transplant centers

Extended criteria donor (ECD) liver allografts are often allocated to less severely ill liver transplant (LT) candidates who are at a relatively lower risk of pretransplant mortality, but it is not clear that the use of ECD allografts will decrease center waitlist mortality (WLM). Individual patient data from the UNOS OPTN database (2002-2005) were aggregated to obtain center-specific data. Deceased donor allografts with any of the following characteristics were defined as ECDs: from a donor with any of the criteria described by the New York State Department of Health Workgroup; or 12+ h of cold ischemia. Multivariate regression was used to examine the relationship between WLM and ECD, non-ECD and LDLT use after adjusting for candidate severity of illness. A total of 3555 ECD transplants, 11,660 standard criteria donor (SCD) transplants, and 717 LDLTs were performed at 100 centers during this period. The model demonstrated that SCD and ECD LTs were inversely correlated with a center's WLM (beta=-0.242 and -0.221, respectively; p <or= 0.003 for each). LDLTs did not significantly reduce WLM (beta=-0.048, p=0.55). In summary, increasing ECD liver allograft use significantly decreased WLM at US centers. Policies encouraging the increase used of ECDs would further reduce WLM.

Liver and intestine transplantation in the United States, 1996-2005

The number of liver transplants performed yearly has slowly and steadily increased over the last 10 years, reaching 6441 procedures in 2005. The number of living donor liver transplants performed rose steadily from 1996 to 2001, when it peaked at 519; since 2003 there have been approximately 320 such procedures performed each year. The continual increase in the size of the waiting list for a liver transplant, which peaked in 2001 at 14 897 patients, was interrupted in 2002 by the implementation of the allocation system based on the model for end-stage liver disease and pediatric end-stage liver disease (MELD/PELD). Activity in all areas of intestinal transplantation continues to increase. One-year patient and graft survival following intestine-alone transplantation now seem to be superior to outcomes following liver-intestine transplantation. Other topics covered here include the recent 'Share 15' component of the MELD allocation system; liver transplantation following donation after cardiac death; simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation and waiting list and post-transplant outcomes for both liver and intestine transplantation, broken out by a variety of clinical and demographic factors.

Reduced mortality with right-lobe living donor compared to deceased-donor liver transplantation when analyzed from the time of listing

Right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) is not yet a fully accepted therapy for patients with end-stage liver failure in the Western hemisphere because of concerns about donor safety and inferior recipient outcomes. An outcome analysis from the time of listing for all adult patients who were listed for liver transplantation (LT) at our center was performed. From 2000 to 2006, 1091 patients were listed for LT. One hundred fifty-four patients (LRD; 14%) had suitable live donors and 153 (99%) underwent RLDLT. Of the remaining patients (DD/Waiting List; n = 937), 350 underwent deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT); 312 died or dropped off the waiting list; and 275 were still waiting at the time of this analysis. The LRD group had shorter mean waiting times (6.0 months vs. 9.8 months; p < 0.001). Although medical model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were similar at the time of listing, MELD scores at LT were significantly higher in the DD/Waiting List group (15.4 vs. 19.5; p = 0.002). Patients in Group 1 had a survival advantage with RLDLT from the time of listing (1-year survival 90% vs. 80%; p < 0.001). To our knowledge, this is the first report to document a survival advantage at time of listing for RLDLT over DDLT.

Adult to adult living-related liver transplant: report on an initial experience in Italy

INTRODUCTION

Living-related liver transplantation has become the treatment of choice for many liver diseases. We present our initial analysis of 53 cases of adult to adult living-related liver transplantation performed in a single institute in Italy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to September 2006, we performed 53 adult to adult living-related liver transplantations. The donors (age 18-53) all had genetic or emotional relationships; they were all ABO identical or compatible. Recipients (ages 18-68) suffered from cirrhosis secondary to viral etiology (18), hepatocellular carcinoma with viral cirrhosis (24), cystic fibrosis (2), primary biliary cirrhosis (2), hepatocellular carcinoma with non-viral cirrhosis (2), alcoholic cirrhosis (1), ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency (OTC), (1) criptogenic cryptogenic cirrhosis, (1) primary sclerosing cholangitis, (1) biliary atresia and metastatic carcinoid (1). Donor liver resection resulted in 51 right hepatectomies and two left hepatectomies. Graft body weight ratio was always above 0.8%; graft implantation was performed with the piggy back technique and, in 43 cases, with the use of veno-venous bypass.

RESULTS

There was neither donor mortality nor need of blood transfusion. Actuarial recipient survival rate at 3 years was 82.66% and graft survival rate was 75.34%. Six patients underwent retransplantation: in four cases due to hepatic artery thrombosis, and in two, due to graft dysfunction. Three patients had one episode each of acute cellular rejection.

CONCLUSION

Adult to adult living-related liver transplantation represents a resource to be used in confronting organ shortage, and is a valuable option for decreasing mortality and drop out from the waiting list.

Current trends in live liver donation

The introduction of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been one of the most remarkable steps in the field of liver transplantation (LT), able to significantly expand the scarce donor pool in countries in which the growing demands of organs are not met by the shortage of available cadaveric grafts. Although the benefits of this procedure are enormous, the physical and psychological sacrifice of the donors is immense, and the expectations for a good outcome for themselves, as well as for the recipients, are high. We report a current overview of the latest trends in live liver donation in its different aspects (i.e. donor's selection, evaluation, operation, morbidity, mortality, ethics and psychology). This review is based on our center's personal experience with almost 200 LDLTs and a detailed analysis of the international literature of the last 7 years about this topic. Knowing in detail how to approach to the different aspects of living liver donation may be helpful in further improve donor's safety and even recipient's outcome.

Selective neutralization of the chemokine TCA3 reduces the increased injury of partial versus whole liver transplants induced by cold preservation

BACKGROUND

Given the shortage of liver donors and the development of techniques for partial liver transplantation, we compared chemokine expression and inflammatory cell infiltration of partial versus whole grafts in a mouse syngeneic liver transplant model.

METHODS

Orthotopic liver transplantation, using whole or partial murine liver grafts, was performed following cold preservation in ViaSpan solution for periods of one to eight hours.

RESULTS

Partial grafts showed more severe cold ischemia/reperfusion injury and greater inflammatory cell infiltration than whole grafts, and was accompanied by the marked intrahepatic upregulation of multiple chemokines. Quantitative analysis showed that compared with expression in whole grafts harvested after the same period of cold ischemia, partial grafts had eightfold more T-cell activation gene (TCA)-3 (CCL1) chemokine messenger RNA (mRNA) expression (P<0.01) and sixfold more inducible protein (IP)-10 chemokine (CCL10) mRNA expression (P<0.01), as well as increased expression of the chemokine receptors CCR8 (receptor for TCA3) and CXCR3 (receptor for IP-10; P<0.01). Blockade of TCA3 by neutralizing monoclonal antibody significantly decreased intragraft IP-10 expression (P<0.05) but not tumor necrosis factor-alpha or interleukin-6 expression in partial grafts, and significantly decreased cold ischemia/reperfusion injury (P<0.05) and associated neutrophil and T-cell infiltration (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate that the chemokine TCA3/CCL1 is important to the pathogenesis of ischemic injury of experimental partial liver grafts, and that its therapeutic targeting within such grafts can overcome the deleterious effects of prolonged cold preservation and restore liver function to the level achieved using whole liver grafts.

Central venous pressure monitoring during living right donor hepatectomy

Low central venous pressure (CVP) has been advocated during liver resection to reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements. As a consequence, CVP catheter placement has been considered essential for hepatic surgery, including living donor hepatectomies. We retrospectively analyzed whether intraoperative management without CVP monitoring influenced fluid administration, blood loss, and patient outcome. Medical charts and hospital data system of 50 adult to adult living liver donors were retrospectively reviewed. Data collection included patient demographics, intraoperative variables such as fluid management, blood loss, urine output, and operating room time. Postoperative variables were collected during the postanesthesia care unit stay and for the first 24 hours after surgery. Patients were then grouped on the basis of the presence or absence of a CVP catheter. Data were reanalyzed and groups compared. Patient groups did not differ in terms of demographics at baseline. When divided into groups with CVP and without CVP, the presence of CVP did not result in decreased intraoperative fluid administration. All patients were hemodynamically stable, and renal function was not different between groups throughout hospitalization. Length of postanesthesia care unit and hospital stay was the same. There was no difference in the frequency of complications during the hospital stay and at 3 months' follow-up. CVP monitoring did not appear to reduce blood loss when compared with patients without CVP monitoring. In centers with extensive experience, CVP monitoring may not be necessary in this highly selective patient population.

Outcomes of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation: a single institution's experience with 335 consecutive cases

OBJECTIVE

To determine outcomes for both donors and recipients of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (AALDLT) and independent factors impacting those outcomes.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Deceased donors for organ transplantation remain extremely rare, making living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) practically the sole therapeutic modality for patients with end-stage liver disease in Japan.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of initial LDLT for 335 consecutive adult (>or=18 years) patients performed between November 1994 and December 2003.

RESULTS

: Of the 335 recipients, 275 received right-liver grafts and the remaining 60 recipients received non-right-liver grafts. Three of the 335 liver grafts were domino-splitting livers. Sixty of the 332 donors other than the domino-donors showed major postoperative complications. Multivariate analysis indicated that accumulation of case experience significantly and advantageously affected the surgical outcomes of these living liver donors, and right-liver donation and prolonged donor operation time were shown to be independent risk factors of major complications in the donors. Post-transplant patient and graft survival estimates were 73.1% and 72.5% at 1 year, 67.7% and 66.3% at 4 years, and 64.7% and 61.9% at 7 years, respectively. Obvious pretransplant encephalopathy, a higher (>or=31) modified Model for End-stage Liver Disease score (including points for persistent ascites and low serum sodium) and higher donor age (>or=50 years) were indicated as independent factors predictive of graft failure (graft loss or death) in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft type and degree of experience exerted a significant impact on the surgical outcomes of AALDLT donors but did not significantly affect the survival outcomes of AALDLT recipients. Better pretransplant conditions and younger age (<50 years) among the living donors appeared to be advantageous in terms of gaining better survival outcomes of patients undergoing AALDLT.

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.

Biliary strictures in 130 consecutive right lobe living donor liver transplant recipients: results of a Western center

Biliary strictures remain the most challenging aspect of adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT). Between 04/2000 and 10/2005, 130 consecutive RLDLTs were performed in our center and followed prospectively. Median follow-up was 23 months (range 3-67) and 1-year graft and patient survival was 85% and 87%, respectively. Overall incidence of biliary leaks (n = 19) or strictures (n = 22) was 32% (41/128) in 33 patients (26%). A duct-to-duct (D-D) or Roux-en-Y (R-Y) anastomosis were performed equally (n = 64 each) with no difference in stricture rate (p = 0.31). The use of ductoplasty increased the number of grafts with a single duct for anastomosis and reduced the biliary complication rate compared to grafts >/=2 ducts (17% vs. 46%; p = 0.02). Independent risk factors for strictures included older donor age and previous history of a bile leak. All strictures were managed nonsurgically initially but four patients ultimately required conversion from D-D to R-Y. Ninety-six percent (123/128) of patients are currently free of any biliary complications. D-D anastomosis is safe after RLDLT and provides access for future endoscopic therapy in cases of leak or stricture. When presented with multiple bile ducts, ductoplasty should be considered to reduce the potential chance of stricture.