The clinical consequences of utilizing donation after cardiac death liver grafts into hepatitis C recipients

Impact of Donation After Circulatory Death Allografts on Outcomes After Liver Transplant for Hepatitis C: A Single-Center Experience and Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the impact of liver transplant from donors after circulatory death on incidence and severity of recurrent hepatitis C virus infection, graft and patient survival and aimed to identify predictors of outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all liver transplants performed at a single center (July 2007-February 2014). Patients with hepatitis C who underwent liver transplant from donors after circulatory death (group 1) were compared with hepatitis C patients who received grafts from donors after brain death (group 2) and patients without hepatitis C who received grafts from donors after circulatory death (group 3).We used the Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis and performed a multivariable analysis for predictors of outcomes using Cox regression. Competing risk was used to analyze hepatitis C recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 196 patients, 107 were included: 25 in group 1, 46 in group 2, and 36 in group 3. All 3 groups were comparable, except for longer cold ischemia time (P < .01) in group 1, lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at transplant in groups 1 and 3 (P < .01), and greater proportion of recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma in groups 1 and 2 (P = .02). Hepatitis C recurrence and severe recurrence at 1 and 3 years were higher in group 1 (but not statistically significant). Severe recurrence was noted in 17% versus 8% at 1 year (P = .12) and 30% versus 14% at 3 years (P = .08). Graft and patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were comparable in all 3 study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent hepatitis C, including severe recurrence, was greater following donation after circulatory death compared with donation after brain death liver transplant. However, graft survival and patient survival were comparable, including in recipients of donation after circulatory death grafts without hepatitis C.

Antemortem Heparin in Organ Donation After Circulatory Death Determination: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Donation after circulatory death determination frequently involves antemortem heparin administration to mitigate peri-arrest microvascular thrombosis. We systematically reviewed the literature to: (1) describe heparin administration practices and (2) explore the effects on transplant outcomes. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies reporting donation after circulatory death determination heparin practices including use, dosage, and timing (objective 1). To explore associations between antemortem heparin and transplant outcomes (objective 2), we (1) summarized within-study comparisons and (2) used meta-regression analyses to examine associations between proportions of donors that received heparin and transplant outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and applied the GRADE methodology to determine certainty in the evidence. For objective 1, among 55 eligible studies, 48 reported heparin administration to at least some donors (range: 15.8%-100%) at variable doses (up to 1000 units/kg) and times relative to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. For objective 2, 7 studies that directly compared liver transplants with and without antemortem heparin reported lower rates of primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, graft failure at 5 y, or recipient mortality (low certainty of evidence). In contrast, meta-regression analysis of 32 liver transplant studies detected no associations between the proportion of donors that received heparin and rates of early allograft dysfunction, primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary ischemia, graft failure, retransplantation, or patient survival (very low certainty of evidence). In conclusion, antemortem heparin practices vary substantially with an uncertain effect on transplant outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding antemortem heparin, clinical trials may be warranted.

Recommendations for Donor and Recipient Selection and Risk Prediction: Working Group Report From the ILTS Consensus Conference in DCD Liver Transplantation

Although the utilization of donation after circulatory death donors (DCDs) for liver transplantation (LT) has increased steadily, much controversy remains, and no common acceptance criteria exist with regard to donor and recipient risk factors and prediction models. A consensus conference was organized by International Liver Transplantation Society on January 31, 2020, in Venice, Italy, to review the current clinical practice worldwide regarding DCD-LT and to develop internationally accepted guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the grade system. International experts in this field were allocated to 6 working groups and prepared evidence-based recommendations to answer-specific questions considering the currently available literature. Working group members 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 recommendations provided by working group 2, covering the entire spectrum of donor and recipient risk factors and prediction models in DCD-LT.

Donations After Circulatory Death in Liver Transplant

The supply of liver grafts for treatment of end-stage liver disease continues to fall short of ongoing demands. Currently, most liver transplants originate from donations after brain death. Enhanced utilization of the present resources is prudent to address the needs of the population. Donation after circulatory or cardiac death is a mechanism whereby the availability of organs can be expanded. Donations after circulatory death pose unique challenges given their exposure to warm ischemia. Technical principles of donations after circulatory death procurement and pertinent studies investigating patient outcomes, graft outcomes, and complications are highlighted in this review. We also review associated risk factors to suggest potential avenues to achieve improved outcomes and reduced complications. Future considerations and alternative techniques of organ preservation are discussed, which may suggest novel strategies to enhance preservation and donor expansion through the use of marginal donors. Ultimately, without effective measures to bolster organ supply, donations after circulatory death should remain a consideration; however, an understanding of inherent risks and limitations is necessary.

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.

Liver transplantation with donation after cardiac death donors: a comprehensive update

BACKGROUND

Use of donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors has been proposed as an effective way to expand the availability of hepatic allografts used in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT); yet, there remains no consensus in the medical literature as to how to choose optimal recipients and donors based on available information.

METHODS

We queried the United Network of Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database for hepatic DCD allografts used in OLT. As of March 31, 2011, 85,148 patients received hepatic allografts from donation-after-brain-death (DBD) donors, and 2351 patients received hepatic allografts from DCD donors. We performed survival analysis using log-rank and Kaplan-Meier tests. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional hazards model. All statistics were performed with SPSS 15.0.

RESULTS

Patients receiving hepatic DCD allografts had significantly worse survival compared with patients receiving hepatic DBD allografts. Pediatric patients who received a hepatic DCD allograft had similar survival to those who received a hepatic DBD allograft. The optimal recipient-related characteristics were age <50 y, International Normalized Ratio <2.0, albumin >3.5 gm/dL, and cold ischemia time <8 h; optimal donor-related characteristics included age <50 y and donor warm ischemia time <20 min.

CONCLUSIONS

By identifying certain characteristics, the transplant clinician's decision-making process can be assisted so that similar survival outcomes after OLT can be achieved with the use of hepatic DCD allografts.

Liver transplantation using Donation after Cardiac Death donors

The success of solid organ transplantation has brought about burgeoning waiting lists with insufficient donation rates and substantial waiting list mortality. All countries have strived to expand donor numbers beyond the standard Donation after Brain Death (DBD). This has lead to the utilization of Donation after Cardiac Death (DCD) donors, also frequently referred to as Non-Heart Beating Donors (NHBD). Organs from these donors inevitably sustain warm ischaemic damage which varies in its extent and affects early graft function as well as graft survival. As a consequence, 'non-vital' organs such as renal transplants have increased rapidly from DCD donors but more 'vital' organ transplants such as the liver have lagged behind. However, an increasing proportion of liver transplants are now derived from DCD donors. This article covers this expansion, current results, pitfalls, and steps taken to minimize complications and to improve outcome, and future developments that are likely to occur.