Timing and candidacy for transplantation in acute liver failure: the European experience

Clinical economics review: liver transplantation

The economic assessment of liver transplantation is complex and involves the cost of the transplant procedure, the cost of alternative treatments and the positive economic contribution of successful outcomes. The one-year survival rates are currently in the order of 80-90% for elective transplants and 60-75% for emergency transplantation. The average cost of a liver transplant operation in the UK is between pounds 32,000 and pounds 45,000. Factors which have a major influence on costs are aetiology, patient status at the time of transplantation, retransplantation and duration of hospital stay. Rejection episodes, renal impairment and surgical complications are of intermediate importance. The cost of transplantation must be balanced against the cost of alternative treatments that would be required if the patient were not transplanted and the positive economic benefit derived from excellent rehabilitation in the majority of recipients.

Indications for and timing of liver transplantation

The tremendous success of OLT as a highly effective treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease has resulted in a rapid increase in the number of candidates for the procedure. Refinements in organ preservation, improvements in surgical technique and immunosuppression, and better postoperative management have contributed to improved survival rates. The discrepancy between the paucity of organs and the increasing numbers of potential recipients will continue to worsen until there are extraordinary breakthroughs in providing alternatives to human whole-organ livers, such as xenografts or cultured hepatocyte infusions. For now, the vast majority of patients with life-threatening liver disease are not likely to receive a liver graft. Thus, the issues of patient selection and timing of OLT have become even more relevant. Prompt referral to a transplant center is not only in the patient's best interest, but also it has been shown to be cost-effective. Over the last 30 years, it has become clear that hepatic malignancy, initially a common reason for OLT, should be an indication for transplantation only in highly selected individuals. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy needs to be defined, and proven treatment alternatives need to be developed. New antiviral agents may enable a large group of patients with chronic hepatitis B to be successfully transplanted, placing even greater demands on the already limited supply of donor livers. Hepatitis B appears to be species specific, and it is conceivable that xenotransplantation from a nonsusceptible donor species may confer protection to HBV reinfection, eliminating the problems of an inadequate donor supply. Until novel approaches, including xenotransplantation, gene therapy, or replacement of hepatic function by cultured hepatocyte infusions, become a widespread reality, future allocation policies may highlight outcome as well as urgency as a fundamental variable to determine if transplantation is reasonable. Survival rates have been shown to fall with advancing levels of urgency, resulting in a conflict between equity and efficacy in organ allocation. As waiting lists for liver transplantation continue to grow, it is becoming increasingly apparent that patients must be referred to a transplant center earlier in the course of liver disease.

Liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure: importance of renal failure

One hundred eighty-one consecutive patients with fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) presenting in a 2-year period were reviewed. In this cohort we examined the impact of pretransplant renal failure on mortality and morbidity following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx). Twenty-seven patients (18 female, 9 male) with a median age of 43.5 years (range 19-65 years) underwent OLTx. FHF was due to idiosyncratic drug reaction (n = 4), paracetamol overdose (n = 3), seronegative hepatitis (n = 17), hepatitis B (n = 1), veno-occlusive disease (n = 1), and Wilson's disease (n = 1). Renal failure was present in 14 patients, 7 of whom died (whereas there was 100% survival in patients without renal failure). Pretransplant renal failure was associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation (13 days vs 6 days, P = 0.05), prolonged intensive care stay (17 days vs 8 days, P = 0.01) and prolonged hospital stay (27 vs 21 days, P = NS). Pretransplant renal failure did not predict renal dysfunction at 1 year after OLTx. We conclude that the survival of patients transplanted for FHF is inferior to that of patients transplanted for chronic liver disease (67% vs 88% 1-year survival in Birmingham). For patients with FHF undergoing transplantation, pretransplant renal failure strongly predicts poor outcome with significantly greater consumption of resources.