Pediatric Liver Transplantation: A Surgical Perspective and New Concepts

The Spillover Effects of Extending Liver Transplantation to Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Discrete Event Simulation Analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an alternative treatment for patients with nonresectable colorectal cancer liver-only metastases (CRLM); however, the potential effects on wait-list time and life expectancy to other patients on the transplant waiting list have not been considered. We explored the potential effects of expanding liver transplantation eligibility to include patients with CRLM on wait-list time and life expectancy in Norway.

METHODS

We developed a discrete event simulation model to reflect the Norwegian liver transplantation waiting list process and included 2 groups: 1) patients currently eligible for liver transplantation and 2) CRLM patients. Under 2 alternative CRLM-patient transplant eligibility criteria, we simulated 2 strategies: 1) inclusion of only currently eligible patients (CRLM patients received standard-of-care palliative chemotherapy) and 2) expanding waiting list eligibility to include CRLM patients under 2 eligibility criteria. Model outcomes included median waiting list time, life expectancy, and total life-years.

RESULTS

For every additional CRLM patient listed per year, the overall median wait-list time, initially 52 d, increased by 8% to 11%. Adding 2 additional CRLM patients under the most restrictive eligibility criteria increased the CRLM patients' average life expectancy by 10.64 y and decreased the average life expectancy for currently eligible patients by 0.05 y. Under these assumptions, there was a net gain of 149.61 life-years over a 10-y programmatic period, which continued to increase under scenarios of adding 10 CRLM patients to the wait-list. Health gains were lower under less restrictive CRLM eligibility criteria. For example, adding 4 additional CRLM patients under the less restrictive eligibility criteria increased the CRLM patients' average life expectancy by 5.64 y and decreased the average life expectancy for currently eligible patients by 0.12 y. Under these assumptions, there was a net gain of 96.36 life-years over a 10-y programmatic period, which continued to increase up to 7 CRLM patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model-based analysis enabled the consideration of the potential effects of enlisting Norwegian CRLM patients for liver transplantation on wait-list time and life expectancy. Enlisting CRLM patients is expected to increase the total health effects, which supports the implementation of liver transplantation for CRLM patients in Norway.

HIGHLIGHTS

Given the Norwegian donor liver availability, adding patients with nonresectable colorectal cancer liver-only metastases (CRLM) to the liver transplantation waiting list had an overall modest, but varying, impact on total waiting list time.Survival gains for selected CRLM patients treated with liver transplantation would likely outweigh the losses incurred to patients listed currently.To improve the total life-years gained in the population, Norway should consider expanding the treatment options for CRLM patients to include liver transplantation.Other countries may also have an opportunity to gain total life-years by extending the waiting list eligibility criteria; however, country-specific analyses are required.

Imaging and Intervention in the Management of Vascular Complications Following Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation is the treatment of choice in majority of the patients with end stage liver disease. Vascular complication following liver transplantation is seen in around 7-13% of the patients and is associated with graft dysfunction and high morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and prompt treatment are crucial in management of these patients. Advances in interventional radiology have significantly improved the management of vascular complications using minimally invasive percutaneous approach. Endovascular management is preferred in patients with late hepatic artery thrombosis, or stenosis, whereas retransplantation, surgical revision, or endovascular management can be considered in patients with early hepatic artery thrombosis or stenosis. Hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm, arterioportal fistula, and splenic artery steal syndrome are often treated by endovascular means. Endovascular management is also preferred in patients with symptomatic portal vein stenosis, early portal vein thrombosis, and symptomatic late portal vein thrombosis, whereas surgical revision or retransplantation is preferred in patients with perioperative portal vein thrombosis occurring within 3 days of transplantation. Venoplasty with or without stent placement can be considered in patients with hepatic venous outflow tract or inferior vena cava obstruction. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) may be required in transplant recipients who develop cirrhosis, often, secondary to disease recurrence, or chronic rejection. Indications for TIPS remain same in the transplant patients; however, major difference is altered vascular anatomy, for which adjunct techniques may be required to create TIPS.

Improved Outcomes for Liver Transplantation in Patients with Biliary Atresia Since Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease Implementation: Analysis of the Society of Pediatric Liver Transplantation Registry

OBJECTIVE

To identify changes in demographics, outcomes, and risk factors for patient and graft loss in patients with biliary atresia undergoing liver transplantation since Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease implementation (2002).

STUDY DESIGN

Demographics and outcomes were compared between patients enrolled in the Society of Pediatric Liver Transplantation registry before (n = 547) and after (n = 1477) 2002. Kruskal-and χ² Wallis tests identified significant differences between eras. Risk factors for patient and graft loss after 2002 were determined by Cox regression model analysis of time to event data.

RESULTS

Significant patient differences after 2002 support increasing disease severity including more status 1 patients and those with a derived Model for End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease score of greater than 30 awaiting transplant. Both patient and graft survival improved after 2002 from 90% to 97% and 81% to 90%, respectively (primary transplant; P < .0001). Significant differences in complications within 30 days included reduced relisting for transplant, rejection, culture-positive infection, repeat operation, hepatic artery thrombosis, portal vein thrombosis, and death/transplant before discharge. Multivariable analysis identified deceased technical variant vs whole graft and retransplantation predictive for patient death, hazard ratios of 4.041 and 8.308, respectively. Deceased technical variant vs whole graft (hazard ratio, 1.963) and donor age 0-5 months vs 1-17 years (hazard ratio, 5.525) were risk factors for graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall outcomes of patients receiving liver transplantation for patients with biliary atresia have improved since 2002 despite evidence of increased disease severity at the time of transplant. Risk factors impacting post-transplant morbidity and mortality in patients with biliary atresia are now mainly surgical including donor variables.

Revision of meso-Rex bypass utilizing a collateral vein in a patient with portal steal phenomenon after liver transplant: A case report

•

Re-do of a meso-Rex Bypass is a feasible option with good outcomes.

•

A large collateral vein is an alternative for an autologous venous conduit in a MRB.

•

Large collaterals ligation during MRB should be performed to avoid portal steal.

Introduction

In children with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction or those who develop portal vein thrombosis after liver transplant, the use of Meso-Rex Bypass (MRB) creates a more physiological state by redirecting mesenteric blood flow back into the intrahepatic portal system via a venous conduit.

Presentation of case

A 3-year-old female with biliary atresia associated with polysplenia syndrome and a surgical history of Kasai portoenterostomy procedure, and an ABO incompatible whole liver transplant. Within a year after transplant she presented with prehepatic portal hypertension, that was treated with MRB using a deceased donor ABO compatible iliac vein as conduit. Six months later, she was taken to the operating room for bypass revision, during the procedure the MRB showed no flow and no thrombus, and a large splenorenal collateral vein that was causing a portal perfusion steal phenomenon was observed. After dissecting the collateral vein, an 8 cm x8 mm segment of this vessel was used as an autologous conduit to re-do the Rex.

Discussion

Failed of MRB can be attributed to portal steal phenomenon, hypercoagulable disorders, bypass contraction or kinking. In this case we believe the culprit to be the former. When there is a history of longstanding portal hypertension, large collaterals develop; thus, intraoperative portal vein flow measurement is critical and ligation of large collaterals during liver transplantation and MRB should be performed to avoid portal steal phenomenon postprocedure.

Conclusion

Using a collateral vein as an alternative autologous venous conduit is a feasible option that can have durable success.