Excellent Outcome in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Treating Patients With Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

Patient Selection for Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Acute-on-chronic Liver Failure

Background and objectives

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is associated with high short-term mortality without liver transplantation (LT). The selection criteria for LT in these patients are not well defined. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with post-transplant survival in ACLF.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective study of patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for ACLF between 2012 and 2022. Out of 1093 transplants, 110 patients had underlying ACLF, based on the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure Consortium (EASL-CLIF) criteria. We looked at factors associated with 1-year posttransplant survival.

Results

The median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 33.5 (31-38), and the 1-year posttransplant survival was 72%. Six risk factors were associated with posttransplant survival, namely, body mass index > 30 kg/m2 [HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.8-10.7], platelet count < 66,000/μl [HR, 2.91; CI,1.2-6.6], poor response to medical treatment [HR, 2.6; CI, 1.1-5.7], drug-resistant bacterial or fungal cultures [HR, 4.2; CI, 1.4-12.4], serum creatinine > 2.5 mg/dl [HR, 3.4; CI, 1.5-7.7], and graft-to-recipient weight ratio < 0.7 [HR, 4.8; CI, 1.4-16.3]. The 1-year post-transplant survival was 84% in patients with 0-2 risk factors (n = 89) and was 6% with 3 risk factors (n = 15) (P < 0.001). For 1-year posttransplant survival, the area under curve (AUC) for the current model was 0.8 (0.69-0.9). The AUC for CLIF-ACLF, Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (CLIF-SOFA), and EASL-CLIF ACLF grades was < 0.5.

Conclusion

In LT for ACLF, acceptable survival can be achieved when less than three high-risk factors are present.

Liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) occurs in the context of advanced liver disease and is associated with hepatic and extrahepatic organ failure, eventually leading to a major risk of short-term mortality. To date, there are very few effective therapeutic options for ACLF. In many cases, liver transplantation is the only life-saving treatment that has acceptable outcomes in carefully selected recipients. This Review addresses key aspects of the use of liver transplantation for patients with ACLF, providing an in-depth discussion of existing evidence regarding candidate selection, the optimal window for transplantation, potential prioritisation of liver grafts for this indication, and the global management of ACLF to bridge patients to liver transplantation.

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Adult-to-adult right lobe graft living donor liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure: a single-centre retrospective study in Vietnam

Introduction

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has a high mortality rate, and liver transplantation is considered a definite treatment for patients with this condition. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in ACLF patients in a single centre in a lower middle-income country, Vietnam.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective study at the 108 Military Central Hospital (Hanoi, Vietnam), enroling 51 patients diagnosed with ACLF based on Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) criteria who underwent LDLT with a right lobe graft from December 2019 to December 2022. The authors utilize the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and APASL ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) scores to evaluate and stratify the severity of ACLF.

Results

The average age of all patients was 47.27±13.61, with 88.24% being male. The average BMI was 22.78±2.61. The most common underlying liver disease was chronic viral hepatitis B (88.2%). The average MELD score of the patients was 34.90±5.61, with 33.3% having MELD score greater than or equal to 40. In terms of ACLF severity, five patients (9.8%) had grade I ACLF, 35 patients (68.6%) had grade II ACLF, and 11 patients (21.6%) had grade III ACLF. The average AARC score was 9.43±1.68. The duration of treatment in the ICU was 8.59±7.27 days, and the length of hospital stay was 28.02±13.45 days. The most common post-transplant complication was biliary complication (19.61%). Death occurred in 7 patients (13.7%). The survival rates at 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years were 84%, 81.7%, and 81.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

Living donor liver transplantation for ACLF patients is safe and has a high post-transplant survival rate. Multidisciplinary care before, during, and after surgery, and the decision to do a liver transplant early, is essential in saving the lives of ACLF patients.

Living donor liver transplant in acute on chronic liver failure grade 3: Who not to transplant

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Liver transplantation(LT)offers definitive treatment for acute on chronic liver failure(ACLF) patients. This study was done to analyze and compare the outcomes of living donor LT(LDLT) in patients with ACLF versus Chronic liver disease(CLD) and within the grades of ACLF. Factors affecting mortality in patients with ACLF and ACLF grade3 (ACLF3) following LDLT were also derived.

METHODS

Records of adult LDLT between 1/2/2017 and 30/9/2021 were analyzed. ACLF was classified based on EASL-CLIF definition. Post-transplant outcomes of ACLF were compared with CLD and within ACLF grades. Post LDLT mortality predictors were identified in ACLF and ACLF3 patients.

RESULTS

Out of 853 patients who had LT in that period; 704 patients with CLD and 103 with ACLF [of which 54 (52.42%) had ACLF3] underwent LDLT. The one month and one-year post LDLT mortality was 8.81% and 9.80% in CLD; 19.42% and 31.06% in ACLF; and 25.92% and 38.89% in ACLF3 respectively. On log regression analysis, use of grafts from older donors and pre-operative respiratory failure in recipients was associated with poor survival in ACLF, while respiratory failure was a predictor of poor survival in ACLF3 following LDLT.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes following LDLT are poorer in ACLF as compared to after CLD. Higher donor age and preoperative respiratory failure with PF Ratio<200 were associated with poor survival post LDLT in ACLF and ACLF3.

Healthcare utilization and outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for patients with APASL-defined acute-on-chronic liver failure

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is associated with excellent survival in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). There is a lack of data assessing the healthcare utilization and outcomes of patients with APASL-defined ACLF undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Our aim was to assess pre-LT healthcare utilization and post-LT outcomes in such patients.

METHODS

Patients with ACLF who underwent LDLT at our center between 1st April 2019 and 1st October 2021 were included.

RESULTS

Seventy-three ACLF patients willing to undergo LDLT were listed; eighteen patients died within 30 days. Fifty-five patients underwent LDLT (age:38.05 ± 14.76 years; alcohol:52.7%; males:81.8%). Most were in grade II ACLF (87.3%) at the time of LDLT (APASL ACLF Research Consortium [AARC] score: 9.05 ± 1; MELD NA: 28.15 ± 4.13). Survival rate was 72.73%; mean follow-up period of 925.21 days; 58.2% (32/55) developed complications during the first year post-LT; 45% (25/55) and 12.7% (7/55) developed infections within and after 3 months. Pre-LT, each patient required a median of 2 (1-4) admissions for 17 (4-45) days. Fifty-six percent (31/55) of patients underwent plasma exchange pre-LDLT. A median amount of Rs. 8,25,090 (INR 26,000-43,58,154) was spent to stabilize the patient (who were sicker and waited longer to undergo LDLT); though post-LT survival benefit was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

LDLT was associated with 73% survival and, thus, is a viable option in those with APASL-defined ACLF. There was a pre-LT high healthcare resource utilization of plasma exchange, with the intention of optimization, while survival benefit has not been demonstrated.

Preventing Small-for-size Syndrome in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Guidelines From the ILTS-iLDLT-LTSI Consensus Conference

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is a well-recognized complication following liver transplantation (LT), with up to 20% developing this following living donor LT (LDLT). Preventing SFSS involves consideration of factors before the surgical procedure, including donor and recipient selection, and factors during the surgical procedure, including adequate outflow reconstruction, graft portal inflow modulation, and management of portosystemic shunts. International Liver Transplantation Society, International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group, and Liver Transplant Society of India Consensus Conference was convened in January 2023 to develop recommendations for the prediction and management of SFSS in LDLT. The format of the conference was based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. International experts in this field were allocated to 4 working groups (diagnosis, prevention, anesthesia, and critical care considerations, and management of established SFSS). The working groups prepared evidence-based recommendations to answer-specific questions considering the currently available literature. The working group members, independent panel, and conference attendees served as jury to edit and confirm the final recommendations presented at the end of the conference by each working group separately. This report presents the final statements and evidence-based recommendations provided by working group 2 that can be implemented to prevent SFSS in LDLT patients.

Liver Transplantation in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

In recent years there has been a significant increase in the incidence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). This syndrome is characterized by infections, organ failures, and high short-term mortality. Although progress in the management of these sick patients has been evident, liver transplantation (LT) remains the best treatment modality to date. Several studies have reported LT as a feasible option, despite organ failures. The outcomes following LT are inversely related to the grade of ACLF. This review discusses the current literature on the feasibility, futility, timing, and outcomes of LT in patients with ACLF.

Should patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3 receive higher priority for liver transplantation?

In this debate, the authors consider whether patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3 (ACLF-3) should receive higher liver transplant priority, with reference to the following clinical case: a 62-year-old male with a history of decompensated alcohol-associated cirrhosis, with recurrent ascites and hepatic encephalopathy, and metabolic comorbidities (type 2 diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension and a BMI of 31 kg/m²). A few days following evaluation for liver transplantation (LT), the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit and placed on mechanical ventilation for neurological failure, FiO₂ of 0.3 with a SpO₂ of 98%, and started on norepinephrine at 0.62 μg/kg/min. He had been abstinent since the diagnosis of cirrhosis a year prior. Laboratory results at admission were: leukocyte count 12.1 G/L, international normalised ratio 2.1, creatinine 2.4 mg/dl, sodium 133 mmol/L, total bilirubin 7 mg/dl, lactate 5.5 mmol/L, with a MELD-Na score of 31 and a CLIF-C ACLF score of 67. On the 7^th day after admission, the patient was placed on the LT waiting list. On the same day, he had massive variceal bleed with hypovolemic shock requiring terlipressin, transfusion of three red blood cell units, and endoscopic band ligation. On day 10, the patient was stabilised with a low dose of norepinephrine 0.03 μg/kg/min, with no new sepsis or bleeding. However, the patient was still intubated for grade 2 hepatic encephalopathy and on renal replacement therapy with a lactate level of 3.1 mmol/L. The patient is currently categorised as having ACLF-3, with five organ failures (liver, kidney, coagulation, circulation, and respiration). Based on the severity of his liver disease and multiorgan failure, the patient is at an exceedingly high risk of death without LT. Is it appropriate to perform LT in such a patient?

Long-term renal outcomes comparison between patients with chronic kidney disease and hepatorenal syndrome after living donor liver transplantation

Background and aims

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a disastrous renal complication of advanced liver disease with a poor prognosis. Restoring normal liver function through liver transplantation (LT) is a standardized treatment with favorable short-term survival. However, the long-term renal outcomes in patients with HRS receiving living donor LT (LDLT) are controversial. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of LDLT in patients with HRS.

Methods

We reviewed adult patients who underwent LDLT between July 2008 and September 2017. Recipients were classified into 1) HRS type 1 (HRS1, N = 11), 2) HRS type 2 (HRS2, N = 19), 3) non-HRS recipients with pre-existing chronic kidney disease (CKD, N = 43), and 4) matched normal renal function (N = 67).

Results

Postoperative complications and 30-day surgical mortality were comparable among the HRS1, HRS2, CKD, and normal renal function groups. The 5-year survival rate was &gt;90% and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) transiently improved and peaked at 4 weeks post-transplantation in patients with HRS. However, renal function deteriorated and resulted in CKD stage ≥ III in 72.7% of HRS1 and 78.9% of HRS2 patients (eGFR &lt;60 ml/min/1.73 m2). The incidence of developing CKD and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) was similar between the HRS1, HRS2, and CKD groups, but significantly higher than that in the normal renal function group (both P &lt; 0.001). In multivariate logistic regression, pre-LDLT eGFR &lt;46.4 ml/min/1.73 m2 predicted the development of post-LDLT CKD stage ≥ III in patients with HRS (AUC = 0.807, 95% CI = 0.617–0.997, P = 0.011).

Conclusions

LDLT provides a significant survival benefit for patients with HRS. However, the risk of CKD stage ≥ III and ESRD among patients with HRS was similar to that in pre-transplant CKD recipients. An early preventative renal-sparing strategy in patients with HRS is recommended.

Liver transplantation in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a dynamic syndrome associated with a very high short-term mortality. Hence, the ongoing assessment of treatment response, an expedited liver transplant evaluation and listing, and the determination of futility of treatment are critical for optimal outcomes. In this review, we appraise our current understanding of the timing and futility of liver transplantation, and the short- and long-term outcomes including the quality of life after deceased or live donor liver transplantation in those with ACLF.