Results of retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C

Evaluation the efficacy and safety of simultaneous splenectomy in liver transplantation patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous splenectomy during liver transplantation (LT) is debated. The present meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of splenectomy on the outcome of LT patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Wanfang databases for relevant studies published until the date of July 15, 2017. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale judgment. The data were analyzed using RevMan5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies consisting of 2198 patients (892 patients received splenectomy during LT [SPLT group] and 1306 patients received LT only [LT group]) were included in the present meta-analysis. Efficacy analysis revealed that pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) between 2 groups was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.50). SPLT group had less postoperative rejection (odds ratio [OR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.50-0.79) and small for size syndrome (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07-0.79). SPLT group had significantly lower preoperative platelet (mean difference [MD] = -17.23, 95% CI: -19.54, -14.91), but significantly higher postoperative platelet (MD = 170.45, 95% CI: 108.33-232.56). Conversely, SPLT group had significant higher preoperative portal pressure (MD = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.75-2.33) and significant lower postoperative portal pressure (MD = -1.17, 95% CI: -2.24, -0.11). Safety analysis revealed that SPLT group had significantly longer operation time (MD = 56.66, 95% CI: 35.96-77.35), more intraoperative blood loss (MD = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.25-1.91), and more intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (MD = 3.77, 95% CI: 3.22-4.33). Furthermore, SPLT group had significantly higher incidence of postoperative hemorrhage (OR = 3.07, 95% CI: 1.92-4.91), postoperative thrombosis (OR = 3.63, 95% CI: 1.06-12.45), and perioperative infection (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: 1.76-3.90). In addition, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in the SPLT group (OR = 3.14, 95% CI: 1.31-7.52). Postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between 2 groups (OR = -1.75, 95% CI: -3.66-0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Splenectomy benefits LT patients in increasing platelet count. However, splenectomy is a morbid procedure as splenectomy increases operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative RBC transfusion, and postoperative complications. Splenectomy does not improve OS but increase perioperative mortality. Therefore, splenectomy should be performed only in selective patients.

Liver Retransplantation: How Much Is Too Much?

Hepatic retransplantation has been surgically challenging since the beginning of liver transplant. Outcomes have improved over time, but patient survival with retransplant continues to be significantly worse than that of primary transplant. Many studies have focused on factors to predict outcomes. Models have been developed to help predict risk, but the decision for retransplant must be a multidisciplinary transplant team decision. The question of "when is too much?" can be guided by recipient and donor factors but is an ethical decision that must be made by the liver transplant team.

Predictive factors for survival and score application in liver retransplantation for hepatitis C recurrence

AIM: To identify risk factors associated with survival in patients retransplanted for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence and to apply a survival score to this population.

METHODS: We retrospectively identified 108 patients retransplanted for HCV recurrence in eight European liver transplantation centers (seven in France, one in Spain). Data collection comprised clinical and laboratory variables, including virological and antiviral treatment data. We then analyzed the factors associated with survival in this population. A recently published score that predicts survival in retransplantation in patients with hepatitis C was applied. Because there are currently no uniform recommendations regarding selection of the best candidates for retransplantation in this setting, we also described the clinical characteristics of 164 patients not retransplanted, with F3, F4, or fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) post-first graft presenting with hepatic decompensation.

RESULTS: Overall retransplantation patient survival rates were 55%, 47%, and 43% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Patients who were retransplanted for advanced cirrhosis had survival rates of 59%, 52%, and 49% at 3, 5, and 10 years, while those retransplanted for FCH had survival rates of 34%, 29%, and 11%, respectively. Under multivariate analysis, and adjusting for the center effect and the occurrence of FCH, factors associated with better survival after retransplantation were: negative HCV viremia before retransplantation, antiviral therapy after retransplantation, non-genotype 1, a Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score < 25 when replaced on the waiting list, and a retransplantation donor age < 60 years. Although the numbers were small, in the context of the new antivirals era, we showed that outcomes in patients who underwent retransplantation with undetectable HCV viremia did not depend on donor age and MELD score. The Andrés score was applied to 102 patients for whom all score variables were available, producing a mean score of 43.4 (SD = 6.6). Survival rates after the date of the first decompensation post-first liver transplantation (LT1) in the liver retransplantation (reLT) group (94 patients decompensated) at 3, 5, and 10 years were 62%, 59%, and 51%, respectively, among 78 retransplanted individuals with advanced cirrhosis, and 42%, 32%, and 16% among 16 retransplanted individuals with FCH. In the non-reLT group with hepatic decompensation, survival rates were 27%, 18%, and 9% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively (P < 0.0001). Compared with non-retransplanted patients, retransplanted patients were younger at LT1 (mean age 48 ± 8 years compared to 53 ± 9 years in the no reLT group, P < 0.0001), less likely to have human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection (4% vs 14% among no reLT patients, P = 0.005), more likely to have received corticosteroid bolus therapy after LT1 (25% in reLT vs 12% in the no reLT group, P = 0.01), and more likely to have presented with sustained virological response (SVR) after the first transplantation (20% in the reLT group vs 7% in the no reLT group, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION: Antiviral therapy before and after retransplantation had a substantial impact on survival in the context of retransplantation for HCV recurrence, and with the new direct-acting antivirals now available, outcomes should be even better in the future.

Natural history, treatment and prevention of hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation: Past, present and future

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease, including cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma is the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. Post-transplant HCV re-infection is almost universal and results in accelerated progression from acute hepatitis to chronic hepatitis, and liver cirrhosis. Comprehension and treatment of recurrent HCV infection after LT have been major issues for all transplant hepatologists and transplant surgeons for the last decades. The aim of this paper is to review the evolution of our knowledge on the natural history of HCV recurrence after LT, including risk factors for disease progression, and antiviral therapy. We will focus our attention on possible ways (present and future) to improve the final long-term results of LT for HCV-related liver disease.

Hepatic retransplant: what have we learned?

Hepatic retransplant accounts for 5% to 15% of liver transplants in most series and is associated with significantly increased hospital costs and inferior patient survival when compared with primary liver transplant. Early retransplants are usually due to primary graft nonfunction or vascular thrombosis, whereas later retransplants are most commonly necessitated by chronic rejection or recurrent primary liver disease. Hepatic retransplant remains the sole option for survival in many patients facing allograft failure after liver transplant. With improved techniques to match retransplant candidates with appropriate donor grafts, it is hoped that the outcomes of retransplant will continue to improve in future.

Retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts

BACKGROUND

This study reviews the outcomes of retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts.

METHODS

A retrospective study of liver retransplants performed between 1996 and 2013 was conducted. The retransplants were divided into the DD group (with deceased donors) and the LD group (with living donors). Survival outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The DD group contained 23 patients and 27 retransplants using whole-liver grafts and the LD group contained 11 patients and 11 retransplants using right-liver grafts. Vascular and biliary complications were the main indications for retransplantation in both groups. The LD group had significantly younger donors, lighter grafts, shorter cold ischemia and longer operations. The two groups were comparable in age, preoperative liver function, warm ischemia, blood loss, transfusion, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, hospital mortality, complication and graft loss. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year patient survival rates were 78.3%, 73.7% and 63.8%, respectively, in the DD group. The LD group had the corresponding rates all at 90.9% (P = 0.246). The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year graft survival rates were 74.1%, 65.8% and 61.5%, respectively, in the DD group. The LD group had the corresponding rates all at 90.9% (P = 0.132).

CONCLUSION

Excellent long-term survival after retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts can be achieved.

Retransplantation of the liver: review of current literature for decision making and technical considerations

Liver transplantation (LTx) is an established treatment modality for patients with end-stage liver disease, metabolic disorders, and patients with acute liver failure. When a graft fails after primary LTx, retransplantation of the liver (reLTx) is the only potential cure. ReLTx accounts for 7%-10% of all LTx in the United States. Early causes of graft failure for which reLTx may be indicated include primary graft nonfunction and vascular inflow thrombosis. ReLTx in such cases in the early postoperative period is usually straightforward as long as an appropriate secondary allograft is secured in a timely fashion. Late indications may include ischemic cholangiopathy, chronic rejection, and recurrence of the primary liver disease. ReLTx performed in the late period is often more complex and selection criteria are more stringent due to the persistent shortage of organs. The question of whether to retransplant patients with recurrent hepatitis C remains controversial, but these practices are likely to change as the epidemic progresses and new treatments evolve. We also present recent results with reLTx from Yale-New Haven Transplant Center and early results with the use of living donors for reLTx.

Liver transplantation and hepatitis C

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompensation. The use of poor quality organs, particularly from older donors, has a highly negative impact on the severity of recurrence and patient/graft survival. Although immunosuppressive regimens have a considerable impact on the outcome, the optimal regimen after liver transplantation for HCV-infected patients remains unclear. Disease progression monitoring with protocol biopsy and new noninvasive methods is essential for predicting patient/graft outcome and starting antiviral treatment with the appropriate timing. Antiviral treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. Living-donor liver transplantation is now widely accepted as an established treatment for HCV cirrhosis and the results are equivalent to those of deceased donor liver transplantation.

Retransplantation in patients with hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection recurs universally after liver transplantation (LT) and fibrosis progression is accelerated in the graft. Retransplantation (RT) is the only therapeutic option to achieve long-term survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis after LT. Patient and graft survival rates after RT are inferior to those after primary LT. It is generally accepted that severe hepatitis C recurrence (cholestatic hepatitis) and forms with rapid fibrosis progression have a poor survival after RT. However, it is not clear whether rapid fibrosis progression in the first graft will be followed by the same rate of fibrosis progression in the second graft. The use of prognostic scores as screening tools has shown an improvement in survival in HCV-infected patients after RT, reaching similar survival rates as those obtained in non HCV-infected patients. Moreover, these scores can identify candidates with a high risk of mortality in whom the use of a new organ would be unreasonable. Prevention of severe hepatitis C recurrence could be the first step to avoid RT. Thus, antiviral treatment on the waiting list (if possible) and early identification and treatment of patients with severe hepatitis C recurrence may be a good strategy to avoid RT. In addition, active management of factors which can accelerate fibrosis progression (donor age, post-transplant diabetes, high dose of corticosteroids) might reduce the incidence of severe forms of hepatitis C recurrence.

Retransplantation for graft failure in chronic hepatitis C infection: a good use of a scarce resource?

AIM

To investigate the outcome of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection undergoing liver retransplantation.

METHODS

Using the UK National Registry, patients undergoing liver transplantation for HCV-related liver disease were identified. Data on patient and graft characteristics, as well as transplant and graft survival were collected to determine the outcome of HCV patients undergoing retransplantation and in order to identify factors associated with transplant survival.

RESULTS

Between March 1994 and December 2007, 944 adult patients were transplanted for HCV-related liver disease. At the end of follow-up, 617 of these patients were alive. In total, 194 (21%) patients had first graft failure and of these, 80 underwent liver retransplantation, including 34 patients where the first graft failed due to recurrent disease. For those transplanted for HCV-related disease, the 5-year graft survival in those retransplanted for recurrent HCV was 45% [95% confidence interval (CI): 24%-64%] compared with 80% (95% CI: 62%-90%) for those retransplanted for other indications (P = 0.01 log-rank test); the 5-year transplant survival after retransplantation was 43% (95% CI: 23%-62%) and 46% (95% CI: 31%-60%), respectively (P = 0.8, log-rank test). In univariate analysis of all patients retransplanted, no factor analyzed was significantly associated with transplant survival.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes for retransplantation in patients with HCV infection approach agreed criteria for minimum transplant benefit. These data support selective liver retransplantation in patients with HCV infection.

The high-risk recipient: the Eighth Annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons' State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium

The evolution of organ transplantation has produced results so successful that many transplant programs commonly see recipients with medical risks, which in the past, would have prohibited transplantation. The Eighth Annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium focused on the high-risk recipient. The assessment of risk has evolved over time, as transplantation has matured. The acceptance of risk associated with a given candidate today is often made in consideration of the relative value of the organ to other candidates, the regulatory environment, and philosophical notions of utility, equity, and fairness. In addition, transplant programs must balance outcomes, transplant volume, and the costs of organ transplantation, which are impacted by high-risk recipients. Discussion focused on various types of high-risk recipients, such as those with coronary artery disease, morbid obesity, and hepatitis C; strategies to reduce risk, such as down-staging of hepatocellular carcinoma and treatment of pulmonary hypertension; the development of alternatives to transplantation; and the degree to which risk can or should be used to define candidate selection. These approaches can modify the impact of recipient risk on transplant outcomes and permit transplantation to be applied successfully to a greater variety of patients.

Incidence of liver retransplantation and its effect on patient survival

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to review our institutional experience with re-liver transplantation (OLT) after split and full-size OLT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated data corresponding to retransplanted patients over an 8-year period who underwent deceased donor OLT at our institution. Variables analyzed included indications for primary OLT, and re-OLT, the type of graft used during the initial versus re-OLT, the time from initial to re-OLT, and patient survival after re-OLT.

RESULTS

Sixty-four of 697 first OLT (9.2%) required re-OLT. Forty-nine cases were among 637 (7.6%) full-size OLT, while 15 were among 60 (25%) split OLT (P < .001). Median time to re-OLT was 8 days (range = 1-1885 days). Main indications for re-OLT were primary nonfunction/initial poor function (44%), hepatic artery thrombosis (26%), biliary complications (11%), and hepatitis C recurrence (6%). Forty-eight percent of the re-OLTs were performed within the first posttransplant week. The overall survival for these 64 patients was 55% and 48% at 1 and 3 years after the primary OLT, and 44% at both 1 and 3 years after the re-OLT, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of re-OLT remains 9%. Approximately half of all re-OLT occured within the first posttransplant week. Early retransplantation was associated with the best patient survival. Overall survival after re-OLT was about 10% to 20% lower than that after primary OLT.

Significant influence of the primary liver disease on the outcomes of hepatic retransplantation

BACKGROUND

There are many indications for hepatic retransplantation.

AIM

To identify factors influencing retransplantation needs and outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retransplantation records from January 1993 to March 2005 were analysed. Patient and disease characteristics and survival outcomes for retransplantation were compared between various groups.

RESULTS

Totally, 286 primary and 42 hepatic retransplantations were performed. Retransplantation indications included primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), primary biliary cirrhosis, chronic hepatitis C (HCV), chronic active hepatitis (CAH), and alcohol-related disease. Mean follow-up post-retransplantation was 31 +/- 9 months. Actuarial patient survival at 3 months, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, and at the end of study was 71.4, 69, 59.5, 54.7, and 50%, respectively. Early and late retransplantation had 1-year survival of 73 and 68.5%, respectively. Retransplantation need was significantly higher for PSC, HCV, and CAH.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatic retransplantation remains a successful salvage option for transplant complications; however, its need is significantly influenced by the primary liver disease.

Multidisciplinary approach to benign biliary strictures

The various approaches used for the management of patients with benign biliary strictures are justified by the diverse nature, clinical presentation, and severity of these strictures. Benign biliary strictures are most commonly postoperative, a consequence of injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy or fibrosis after biliary duct-to-duct or bilioenteric anastomoses (ie, liver transplantation). Less frequently, benign strictures are due to chronic pancreatitis or other nonmalignant diseases, including external compression, parasites, stone perforation, and infections. Because of their peculiar pathogenesis, localization, and short extension into the bile duct, the majority of these strictures can be approached by operative treatments such as surgical bypass and endoscopic--or radiological--dilation. In contrast, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a systemic disease with immune-mediated inflammation and subsequent fibrosis of the bile ducts with the development of multiple strictures due to an "intrinsic" liver disease; thus, medical therapy and pharmacologic research are mainly focused on the treatment of PSC rather than other benign biliary strictures. However, none of the previously mentioned benign strictures has a univocal and sole treatment. Any attempt to identify a standard treatment for all the strictures is questionable, inconclusive, and most likely useless due to the diversity of patients and diseases. Gastroenterologists, radiologists, and surgeons work in tight collaboration, not in competition, to individualize the patients' treatment. The morphology and extension of the stricture, its location, the theoretical pathogenesis (eg, intrinsic strictures, strictures due to inflammation and fibrosis after bile leak, ischemic lesions), the patients' specific characteristics (comorbidity and history of prior surgery, including enterobiliary anastomoses and gastric resection), and preferences should indicate the treatment that may offer the patient major benefits with a lower complication rate. Unfortunately, in most of the cases, choosing between different treatments is more likely based on local availability than their actual effectiveness and indication.

The progression of hepatitis B- and C-infections to chronic liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma: presentation, diagnosis, screening, prevention, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Much information has been gained in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC during the last 15 years. Ever improving imaging technology has made nonhistologic diagnostic criteria possible, albeit controversial. Liver transplantation, resection, and RFA are considered curative options. Yet,HCC incidence is steadily rising because of limited progress on disease prevention. Accurate and cost-effective screening is necessary. Presently, only 10% to 15% of HCC patients present with a curative stage of disease. Because the field of HCC is rapidly changing, patients with HCC should be referred to liver centers with a full array of services, from surgical to oncologic. The prognosis for HCC patients will surely improve with a multidisciplinary approach to care and further clinical research. Better screening and prevention of recurrence should eventually improve survival. It is hoped that antiviral treatment studies will lower the risk of HCC, and that these changes will occur soon enough to help the many patients at risk for or diagnosed with HCC over the next several years.

Liver retransplantation of patients with hepatitis C infection is associated with acceptable patient and graft survival

Infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause of liver transplantation (LT), while liver retransplantation (RT) for HCV is controversial as a result of concerns over poor outcomes. We sought to compare patient and graft survival after RT in patients with and without HCV. We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing RT at our center between February 1998 and April 2004. Indications for RT, HCV status, patient, and donor characteristics, laboratory values, and hospitalization status at RT were collected. A total of 108 patients (48 HCV and 60 non-HCV) underwent RT during the study period, with mean post-RT follow-up of 1,096 days (range, 0-2,888 days). Grafts from donors aged>60 years were used less frequently in HCV patients at RT (6%) compared with LT (47%), P<0.001. There was no difference between HCV vs. non-HCV patients in 1- and 3-year patient survival (respectively, 79% vs. 63%, and 71% vs. 63%) and graft survival (respectively, 67% vs. 66%, and 59% vs. 56%). Post-RT mortality and graft failure in HCV patients occurred within the first year in 89% of patients, and 83% were unrelated to HCV recurrence. We conclude that patients should not be excluded from consideration for retransplantation solely on the basis of a diagnosis of HCV.

Retransplantation for hepatitis C: results of a U.S. multicenter retransplant study

It is widely perceived that outcomes are relatively poor following retransplantation (reTX) for recurrent of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Transplant centers debate the utility of offering another liver to these patients. A U.S. study group was formed to retrospectively compare survival after reTX in patients with recurrent HCV (histologically proven) and those transplanted for other indications greater than 90 days after first transplantation, from 1996 to 2004. Patients were divided into 3 groups; group 1: HCV reTX (n = 43), group 2: non-HCV reTX (n = 73), and group 3: recurrent HCV but no reTX (n = 156). They were predominantly male, Caucasian, with mean age of 47.2 yr. The commonest indications for non-HCV reTX were chronic rejection (36%), hepatic artery thrombosis (31%) and recurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis (17%). Duration of hospitalization, number of intensive care unit (ICU) days, and time interval from listing to transplantation or reTX were similar between reTX groups. The 1-yr and 3-yr survival rates after reTX were also similar for HCV reTX and non-HCV reTX groups (1 yr, 69% vs. 73%; 3 yr, 49% vs. 55%). Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were not predictive of survival from reTX. However, with a MELD score of >30 in the non HCV group, survival was <50%. In the recurrent HCV not undergoing reTX group, 30% were reevaluated for reTX but only 15% were listed for reTX and the 3-yr survival was 47%. The most common reasons for not listing for reTX were recurrent HCV within 6 months (22%), fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (19%), and renal dysfunction (9%). In conclusion, patients retransplanted for recurrent HCV had similar 1-yr and 3-yr survival when compared to patients undergoing reTX for other indications. MELD scores were not predictive of post-reTX survival. Survival was <50% in the non-HCV reTx group with MELD score of >30. Many patients with recurrent HCV are not considered for reTX and die from recurrent disease.

Outcome after liver re-transplantation in patients with recurrent chronic hepatitis C

Long-term outcome after liver retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C has been reported to be inferior to other indications. The identification of factors associated which improved long-term results may help identify hepatitis C positive patients who benefit from liver retransplantation. Outcome after liver retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C was analyzed in 18 patients (group 1) and compared with hepatitis C positive patients undergoing liver retransplantation for initial nonfunction (group 2, n=11) and patients with liver retransplantation for other indications (group 3, n=169). Five-year patient survival following retransplantation for groups 1, 2 and 3 was 59% 84% and 60%. Increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and serum bilirubin, as well as white cell count and MELD score at day of retransplantation were associated with impaired patient outcome. Five-year survival after retransplantation in patients with recurrent hepatitis C is similar to that in patients undergoing liver retransplantation for other indications. Our analysis showed MELD score, bilirubin, ALT levels and white cell counts preorthotopic liver transplantation are important predictive factors for outcome. This observational study may help select patients and identify the optimal time-point of liver retransplantation in ''Hepatitis C'' virus positive patients in the future.

Management of hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been associated with progression to cirrhosis in approximately 20% of patients, 5 years postoperatively. Accelerated decompensation has also been noted when compared with cirrhosis in non-transplant patients. Different treatment strategies are available for recurrent HCV infection post-OLT, but efforts are hindered by the modest response rates, poor tolerability and the risk of rejection as well as graft loss. Anti-HCV immunoglobulin therapy to prevent graft infection with HCV has no established role at present but studies are ongoing. Treatment prior to transplantation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has been evaluated but the results are too preliminary to make firm recommendations. Prophylactic interferon-based antiviral therapy in the early postoperative period to prevent graft infection was shown to have low response rates and high rates of adverse effects. Treatment of established recurrent HCV infection with combination peginterferon (pegylated interferon) and ribavirin is associated with 10-59% sustained virological response and the predictive value of a positive early virological response has been validated in the post-transplant setting. Improvement in inflammatory activity after viral eradication is well established, but fibrosis regression or stabilisation is less predictable and factors such as rejection and biliary complications may still contribute to graft loss. Most studies have initiated therapy at least 6 months postoperatively in order to optimise patient tolerance and enable the addition of ribavirin. The use of adjuvant agents to treat drug-induced neutropenia and anaemia in this population is evolving and becoming a crucial part of therapy. Determination of optimal doses of both pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and guidance on when to stop treatment, as well as improving tolerability are important steps in achieving higher response rates and minimising drug toxicity.

Trends and experiences in liver retransplantation over 15 years

Compared to primary liver transplantation (LT), the inferior results in the outcome of liver retransplantation (re-LT) continue to be a major challenge. The purpose of this study was to analyze changes in and outcomes of re-LT over a period of 15 years at the Charité Virchow Clinic. Between 1989 and 2003, we performed 1,619 LTs and 157 re-LTs (9.7%) in 1,462 patients. A total of 119 retransplants (50 females, 69 males) were analyzed after consideration of exclusion criteria: recipient age <16 years, second re-LT, primary LT as split-liver or living-related LT, or combination with renal transplantation or Whipple operation. All patients received a whole-size organ. Mean follow-up was 62 months (6 days to 187 months). The main indications for re-LT were initial nonfunction (26.9%), recurrence of viral-induced hepatitis (20.2%), or acute and chronic rejection or thrombosis of the hepatic artery (both 16.8%). The main causes of death were bacterial infections (26.0%) as well as bleeding complications or recurrence of disease (both 16.0%) within the first postoperative month. Overall, 50 out of 119 patients (42%) died after re-LT, 26 patients within the first 3 months and 38 within 1 year. Overall patient survival was 89.9% after 1 month, 78.2% after 1 year, and 67.1% after 5 years. In conclusion, our study showed good clinical results after re-LT. Apart from the changing indications for re-LT with an increasing amount of initial organ failure and hepatic artery thrombosis, the analysis also showed a decreasing amount of complications such as rejection, ischemic type biliary lesions, and recurrence of the disease with unchanged outcome over a period of 15 years.

Morbidity and mortality in liver retransplantation

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of orthotopic liver retransplantation (re-OLT) ranges from 6% to 11%. The most frequent causes of early re-OLT are allograft failure, uncontrolled acute rejection, and vascular complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 512 orthotopic liver transplants (OLTs) in 482 patients over 15 years.

RESULTS

The incidence of re-OLT was 6.6%, with a higher percentage of men requiring re-OLT than first-time OLT (75.0% vs 63.0%, P < .05). The reasons for re-OLT were thrombosis 21.7%, aneurysm 6.5%, stenosis 3.2%, primary nonfunction (PNF) 21.7%, and chronic rejection or recurrence of the initial disease 40.4%. Complications included PNF (22.0%), acute renal failure (65.6%), postoperative infection (87.5%), and adult respiratory distress syndrome (9.4%; P < .05). No differences were seen in the incidence of septicemia or postoperative hemorrhage. The average survival was much lower in re-OLT (21.8 days) compared with OLT (194.5 days; P < .05). The mortality rates in re-OLT were 100% for primary biliary cirrhosis, 85.7% for HCV, 50% for alcoholic cirrhosis, and 20% for HBV. A direct association between the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and the number of complications was present.

DISCUSSION

There was a greater requirement for re-OLT in men and those patients transplanted due to hepatitis B virus cirrhosis and fulminant hepatitis (P < .05). The re-OLT patients had no greater incidence of sepsis compared with the OLT patients, although they did have a greater incidence of primary graft dysfunction, acute renal failure, adult respiratory distress syndrome, and postoperative infection (P < .05). The MELD was a good parameter for predicting graft evolution. Re-OLT in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus was associated with a high degree of mortality.

Treating hepatitis C infection in liver transplant recipients

Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a growing problem worldwide, with up to 300 million individuals infected, and those with chronic infection are at risk for cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. HCV infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States and Europe. Unfortunately, although transplantation is effective for treating decompensated cirrhosis and limited hepatocellular carcinoma associated with hepatitis C, HCV reinfection is virtually the rule among transplant recipients. Reinfection of the graft is associated with more rapidly progressive disease, with a median time to cirrhosis of 8 to 10 yr. Unfortunately, treatment of chronic HCV in liver transplant recipients is suboptimal. Combination therapy with interferon (pegylated and nonpegylated forms) plus ribavirin appears to provide maximum benefits. Drug therapy is usually administered for recurrent disease. No prophylactic therapy is available. Preemptive regimens offer no distinctive advantages over treatments begun for recurrent disease. Overall, treatment is poorly tolerated, with frequent need for dose reductions, especially from cytopenias, and drug discontinuations in up to 50% of patients. Optimizing drug doses is important in maximizing sustained virological response rates. Future therapies may include ribavirin alternatives with lower rates of anemia, alternative interferons with lower rates of cytopenias, and new antiviral drugs that can be used alone or in combination with either interferon or ribavirin to enhance sustained virological response rates and improve tolerability. Liver Transpl 12:1192-1204, 2006. (c) 2006 AASLD.

Histological recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation: Outcome and role of retransplantation

Impact of hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence on long-term outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is highly variable, and the role of retransplantation is still debated. From 1996 to 2003, 131 OLT with histologically proven HCV recurrence and 6 months of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. One and 5-yr overall survivals were 90.7 and 81.3%, respectively. The mean time of HCV recurrence was 10.1 +/- 6.2 months in patients whose donor's age was less than 70 yr old, and 6.6 +/- 4.7 in patients whose donor's age was more than 70 (P < 0.01). The mean time between OLT and HCV recurrence was 10.7 +/- 8.2 months among patients still alive, and 5 +/- 4.2 among the 20 who died (P = 0.02). In 16 (12.2%) patients, retransplantation was required for severe HCV recurrence; 5 are still alive and 11 (68.7%) died. The mean survival time was 16.2 +/- 6 months if re-OLT was performed within 12 months from first OLT, and it was 45.9 +/- 10 months if re-OLT was performed later (P < 0.01). In conclusion, donors older than 70 yr are at high risk of early HCV recurrence; expectancy of life is significantly reduced in case of histologically proven recurrence within 6 months. Outcome is quite dismal in patients with early HCV recurrence requiring retransplantation within 1 yr of first OLT.

Diagnosis and management of allograft failure

The article focuses on diagnosis and management of allograft failure in four main categories: (1) ischemic-reperfusion injury (primary nonfunction), (2) technical complications (hepatic artery and portal vein thrombosis), (3) chronic rejection, and (4) recurrent disease. It also discusses the complex problems involved in retransplantation for allograft failure.

An outcome comparison between primary liver transplantation and retransplantation based on the pretransplant MELD score

Survival after liver retransplantation (RLTX) is worse than after primary liver transplantation (LTX). We studied retrospectively the 2-year outcome in 44 patients who received RLTX more than 30 days after the primary transplant and in 669 after LTX performed between December 1993 and October 1999, focusing on the relation between the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score immediately pretransplant and post-transplant survival. A 2-year survival for RLTX was inferior to LTX (65.9% vs. 82.9%, P < or = 0.01). This difference was greatest with MELD scores < 25; survival within 2 years remained 11.3-18.2% less for RLTX than for LTX (6 months, P = 0.002; 12 months, P = 0.029, 24 months, P = 0.123). Mortality was mainly related to early vascular complications and sepsis. Two-year survival after RLTX was 81.8% if RLTX occurred < 2 years after LTX and 50% if the interval between LTX and RLTX was > 2 years (P < 0.05). MELD scores were similar in 2-year survivors and nonsurvivors after late RLTX (P = 0.82). Late RLTX is marked by poor survival regardless of the pretransplant MELD score. The MELD-based allocation system may not benefit patients who undergo retransplantation.

Splenectomy and preemptive interferon therapy for hepatitis C patients after living-donor liver transplantation

Recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation is a major cause of graft failure. We routinely perform preemptive interferon and ribavirin therapy in patients after living-donor liver transplantation indicated for hepatitis C-related cirrhosis. One of the obstacles for the therapy includes blood cytopenia. To overcome this problem, we recently performed splenectomy concurrently with liver transplantation. Thirty-five patients underwent liver transplantation and received preemptive therapy for hepatitis C. They were divided into two groups: those with splenectomy (group A, n = 21) and those without (group B, n = 14). There was no significant difference in the frequency of morbidity between the groups. Platelet counts were well maintained in group A patients during the therapy, and cytopenia led to the discontinuation of the therapy in one group B patient. The results of the preliminary study warrant a randomized control trial to examine the feasibility of splenectomy and preemptive viral therapy during liver transplantation for hepatitis C.

A single-center experience of late retransplantation of the liver

Liver retransplantation is considered to carry a higher risk than primary transplantation. However, there are an increasing number of retransplant candidates, especially owing to late graft failure. The aim of this study was to analyze a single-center experience in late liver retransplantation. The overall rate of primary retransplantation was 11.4% (28 re-OLT out of 245 primary OLT); the 14 (52%) who underwent retransplantation at more than 3 months after the first transplant were analyzed by a medical record review. Causes of primary graft failure leading to retransplantation were chronic hepatic artery thombosis in five cases (36%); recurrent HCV cirrhosis in four cases (29%); chronic rejection in two cases (14%); veno-occlusive disease; hepatic vein thrombosis or idiopathic graft failure in one case each (7%). UNOS status at re-OLT was always 2A, all patients were hospitalized; three were intensive care unit bound. ICU and total hospital stay had been 7 +/- 5 and 28 +/- 16 days, respectively. One- and 2-year patient and graft survivals were 84% and 62% and 67% and 67%, respectively. Death occurred in four patients. Two out of the three recovered in ICU at the time of retransplantation, at a median interval of 15 +/- 9 days after retransplantation. The survival rate after late retransplantation is improving, and this option should be considered to be a efficient way to save lives, especially by defining the optimal timing for retransplantation.

Cyclosporine suppresses hepatitis C virus in vitro and increases the chance of a sustained virological response after liver transplantation

Cyclosporine is an immunosuppressive agent widely used in the management of liver transplant recipients. Cyclosporine has been shown to have antiviral activities against HIV, herpes simplex, and vaccinia viruses. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of Cyclosporine in viral clearance in the liver transplant recipients during therapy with combination of interferon and ribavirin, and to determine the anti-viral potential of Cyclosporine in vitro. Immunosuppression consisted of either Cyclosporine or Tacrolimus-based therapy. Both groups received therapy with interferon and ribavirin for 48 weeks when evidence of progressive histologic disease was determined. We found that subjects on Cyclosporine-based immunosuppression (n = 56) had a higher sustained virological response of 46% compared to 27% in the patients on Tacrolimus-based therapy (n = 59, P = 0.03). In vitro studies were performed to evaluate the antiviral effect of Cyclosporine in the replicon system. These studies showed that Cyclosporine inhibits hepatitis C viral replication in a dose-dependent manner. Combination of Cyclosporine with interferon showed additive effect, and its function is independent of interferon signaling pathways. In conclusion, Cyclosporine may offer an advantage to Tacrolimus in those patients undergoing interferon-based therapy and should be studied in a prospective randomized trial.

Management of HCV infection and liver transplantation

A major challenge facing liver transplant recipients and their physicians is recurrence of hepatitis C virus infection following otherwise technically successful liver transplantation. Recurrent infection leads to diminished graft and patient survival. Although a number or predictors of severe recurrence have been identified, no definitive strategy has been developed to prevent recurrence. Generally the tempo of hepatitis C recurrence is gauged by serial liver biopsies with the decision to intervene with antiviral therapy based on local philosophy and expertise. Treating hepatitis C in this population has a number of major challenges including diminished patient tolerance for side-effects as well as managing the patient's immunesuppression. However sustained viral responses are possible with the potential to reduce the impact of recurrent hepatitis on the graft. However recurrent hepatitis C virus infection will remain the most frequent form of recurrent disease in liver transplant programs for the foreseeable future.

Recurrent hepatitis C after retransplantation: factors affecting graft and patient outcome

Retransplantation (re-LT) of patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) carries significant morbidity and mortality, negatively impacting on an already scarce donor allograft pool. In this study, we investigated the outcome of allografts and patients after re-LT due to recurrent HCV. Between 1989 and 2002, 47 patients were retransplanted at our institution due to HCV-related graft failure. Clinical HCV recurrence after re-LT was diagnosed when patients had acute liver enzyme elevation correlated with histological recurrence. The independent influence of these variables on survival was tested using Cox regression model. Chi-squared tests were used to examine the influence of individual demographic and pre/perioperative variables on recurrence. Thirty-one (66%) patients died after re-LT (median 2.2 months). Donor age >60, clinical HCV recurrence, and graft failure due to cirrhosis were significant risk factors for mortality (risk ratios of 3.6, 3.3, and 2.4, respectively). Pre-LT MELD score was lower among survivors (22+/- 5 vs. 27+/- 8). Following re-LT, 38 patients had at least one biopsy due to acute liver dysfunction; 19 of them (50%) had recurrence within the first 3 months. High-dose solumedrol was correlated with early recurrence. No association was found between time of recurrence after the first LT and time of recurrence after re-LT. In conclusion, patients with cirrhosis due to recurrent HCV undergoing re-LT have an extremely high mortality rate; older allografts should be avoided in retransplanting these patients. The timing of clinical recurrence after initial liver transplantation is not predictive of the timing of recurrence after re-LT. Patients experiencing early graft failure due to accelerated forms of HCV should not be denied re-LT with the expectation that a similar disease course will occur after re-LT.

Liver retransplantation for hepatitis C virus recurrence: a survey of liver transplant programs in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver failure is the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT). The number requiring re-LT is expected to grow as patients live long enough to develop graft failure and recurrent disease. Numerous factors have been identified as influencing survival after re-LT. To gain insight into how transplant centers are dealing with this issue and whether published prognostic factors are being used, we conducted a survey of liver transplant centers across the US in late 2003.

METHODS

Surveys consisting of 6 multiple-choice questions were sent to all 96 adult transplant medical directors in the U.S.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (57%) surveys were returned. Of these respondents, 95% would offer re-LT for allograft failure caused by recurrent HCV. A little more than half believed age >60 years and development of allograft cirrhosis after <2 years should exclude a patient from re-LT. However, less than half thought international normalized ratio (INR), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), and bilirubin were important factors. After initial LT, 40% of the respondents do not have a protocol for managing HCV recurrence, and 33% responded that they treat only those who develop severe recurrence. In contrast, for re-LT, 67% preemptively treat HCV recurrence. Compared to 5 years ago, 75% believe practice patterns have changed in respect to retransplanting patients with HCV: Most were less likely to offer re-LT because of associated poor long-term survival in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

As of late 2003, nearly all surveyed transplant medical directors in the U.S. would offer re-LT to recurrent HCV. Perceived practice patterns for re-LT are at variance with published outcome data.

Retrasplante hepático: análisis de los resultados en 50 pacientes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Liver re-transplantation (re-LT) is an accepted indication for some (technical problems, primary non-function [PNF]) but not all indications, particularly recurrence of the original disease, such as hepatitis C. We aimed to determine in our center: a) the rate of survival following re-transplantation for all and each different indication; b) to compare it to that obtained by a control group; c) to assess whether late re-LT, excluding PNF and surgical problems, and re-LT in HCV (+) patients are associated with a higher mortality, and d) to estimate medical costs.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Form 1991 to April 2002, 50 re-LT were done (group 1). Group 2 consisted of 45 primary LT controlled by transplant date. Group 1 was divided in two subgroups: a) re-LT after 6 months of the first LT (recurrence of primary liver disease n = 20, chronic rejection n = 5), b) Re-LT in the first 6 months (PNF n = 13, artery thrombosis n = 12). We analyzed donor, recipient, surgical and immunosuppressive-related variables.

RESULTS

The mean age was 50 years (range: 23-63) (72% men). Actuarial survival for re-LT was lower than for the control group: 64%, 57% and 50% vs 84%, 82% and 82% at 1st, 3rd and 5th year, respectively. By indication, the 3-year survival was: PNF: 61% (p = 0.05), HAT: 58% (p = 0.02), recurrence of primary disease: 52% (p = 0.001), chronic rejection: 60% (p = 0.346). Although not reaching statistical significance, survival was lower in late vs early re-LT (p = 0.16) and in HCV-infected versus non-infected patients (p = 0.08). In the HCV (+) group, there were no differences by re-transplant indication (p = 0.8). Medical costs and complications were substantially higher in group 1 vs group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Re-LT is associated with substantial medical costs and mortality, particularly in patients infected with HCV.

Hepatitis C is a risk factor for death after liver retransplantation

Retransplantation for liver allograft failure associated with hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been increasing due to nearly universal posttransplant HCV recurrence and has been demonstrated to be associated with poor outcomes. We report on the risk factors for death after retransplantation among liver recipients with HCV. A retrospective cohort of liver transplant recipients who underwent retransplantation between January 1997 and December 2002 was identified in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Cox regression was used to assess the relative effect of HCV diagnosis on mortality risk after retransplantation and was adjusted for multiple covariates. Of 1,718 liver retransplantations during the study period, 464 (27%) were associated with a diagnosis of HCV infection. Based on Cox regression, retransplant recipients with HCV had a 30% higher covariate-adjusted mortality risk than those without HCV diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.54; P = 0.002). Other covariates associated with significant relative risk of death after retransplantation included older recipient age, presence in an intensive care unit (ICU), serum creatinine, and donor age. Additional regression analysis revealed that the increase in mortality risk associated with HCV was concentrated between 3 and 24 months postretransplantation, among patients age 18 to 39 at retransplant, and in patients retransplanted during the years 2000 to 2002. In conclusion, HCV liver recipients account for a considerable proportion of all retransplantations performed. Surprisingly, younger age predicted a higher mortality for recipients with HCV undergoing liver retransplantation. This may reflect a willingness to retransplant younger patients with an increased severity of illness or a more virulent HCV infection in this population. Although HCV was predictive of an increased risk of death, consideration of other characteristics of HCV patients, including donor and recipient age and need for preoperative ICU care may identify those at significantly higher risk.

The progression of hepatitis B- and C-infections to chronic liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma: presentation, diagnosis, screening, prevention, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Much information has been gained in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC during the last 15 years. Ever improving imaging technology has made nonhistologic diagnostic criteria possible, albeit controversial. Liver transplantation, resection, and RFA are considered curative options. Yet, HCC incidence is steadily rising because of limited progress on disease prevention. Accurate and cost-effective screening is necessary. Presently, only 10% to 15% of HCC patients present with a curative stage of disease. Because the field of HCC is rapidly changing, patients with HCC should be referred to liver centers with a full array of services, from surgical to oncologic. The prognosis for HCC patients will surely improve with a multi-disciplinary approach to care and further clinical research. Better screening and prevention of recurrence should eventually improve survival. It is hoped that antiviral treatment studies will lower the risk of HCC, and that these changes will occur soon enough to help the many patients at risk for or diagnosed with HCC over the next several years.

Living donor and split-liver transplants in hepatitis C recipients: does liver regeneration increase the risk for recurrence?

Concern exists that partial liver transplants (either a living donor [LD] or deceased donor [DD] in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients may be associated with an increased risk for recurrence. From 1999 to 2003, at our institution, 51 HCV-positive recipients underwent liver transplants: 32 whole-liver (WL) transplants, 12 LD transplants and 7 DD split transplants. Donor characteristics differed in that WL donors were older, and LD livers had lower ischemic times. Recipient characteristics were similar except that mean MELD scores in LD recipients were lower (p < 0.05). With a mean follow-up of 28.3 months, 46 (90%) recipients are alive: three died from HCV recurrent liver disease and two from tumor recurrence. Based on 1-year protocol biopsies, the incidence of histologic recurrence in the three groups is as follows: WL, 81%; LD, 50% and DD split, 86% (p = 0.06 for LD versus WL). The mean grade of inflammation on the biopsy specimens was: WL, 1.31; LD, 0.33 and DD split, 1.2 (p = 0.002 for LD versus WL; p = 0.03 for LD versus DD split). Mean stage of fibrosis was: WL, 0.96; LD, 0.22 and DD split, 0.60 (p = 0.07 for LD versus WL). Liver regeneration does not seem to affect hepatitis C recurrence as much, perhaps, as factors such as DD status, donor age and cold ischemic time.

Factors that identify survival after liver retransplantation for allograft failure caused by recurrent hepatitis C infection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is becoming the most common indication for liver retransplantation (ReLTx). This study was a retrospective review of the medical records of liver transplant patients at our institution to determine factors that would identify the best candidates for ReLTx resulting from allograft failure because of HCV recurrence. The patients were divided into 2 groups on the basis of indication for initial liver transplant. Group 1 included ReLTx patients whose initial indication for LTx was HCV. Group 2 included patients who received ReLTx who did not have a history of HCV. We defined chronic allograft dysfunction (AD) as patients with persistent jaundice (> 30 days) beginning 6 months after primary liver transplant in the absence of other reasons. HCV was the primary indication for initial orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in 491/1114 patients (44%) from July 1996 to February 2004. The number of patients with AD undergoing ReLTx in Groups 1 and 2 was 22 and 12, respectively. The overall patient and allograft survival at 1 year was 50% and 75% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = .04). The rates of primary nonfunction and technical problems after ReLTx were not different between the groups. However, the incidence of recurrent AD was higher in Group 1 at 32% versus 17% in Group 2 (P = .04). Important factors that predicted a successful ReLTx included physical condition at the time of ReLTx (P = .002) and Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (P = .008). In conclusion, HCV is associated with an increased incidence of chronic graft destruction with a negative effect on long-term results after ReLTx. The optimum candidate for ReLTx is a patient who can maintain normal physical activity. As the allograft shortage continues, the optimal use of cadaveric livers continues to be of primary importance. The use of deceased donor livers in patients with allograft failure caused by HCV remains a highly controversial issue.

Retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C in the MELD era: maximizing utility

1. Retransplantation (re-LT) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence is controversial. Although re-LT accounts for 10% of all liver transplants (LTs), the number of patients requiring re-LT is expected to grow as primary LT recipients survive long enough to develop graft failure from recurrent disease. 2. Utility, as applied to the medical ethics of transplantation, refers to allocating organs to those individuals who will make the best use of them. The utility function (U) of liver transplantation is represented by the product of outcome (O = 1-year survival with LT) times emergency (E = 3-month mortality without LT), i.e., U = O x E. 3. For primary LT, maximal U is achieved by allocating organs at the highest model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (i.e., "sickest first"). No significant differences exist between HCV and non-HCV diagnoses. 4. For re-LT, maximal utility for HCV and non-HCV diagnoses are achieved at MELD scores of 21 and 24, respectively. Utility starts to decline at MELD scores above 28. 5. The current allocation system (MELD) fails to maximize utility with regard to re-LT.

Hepatitis C recurrence is more severe after living donor compared to cadaveric liver transplantation

Preliminary reports suggested that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has a more aggressive course following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) compared to cadaveric liver transplantation (CLT). The aim of this prospective study was to establish if HCV disease recurrence differs between LDLT and CLT. A cohort of 116 consecutive HCV-infected patients undergoing 117 LTs in a single center from March 2000 to August 2003 were followed-up, including systematic liver biopsies. Severe recurrence (SR) was defined as biopsy-proven cirrhosis and/or the occurrence of clinical decompensation. After a median follow-up of 22 months (2.6-44 months), 26 (22%) patients developed SR (decompensation in 12), involving 17 (18%) of 95 patients undergoing CLT and 9 (41%) of 22 undergoing LDLT. The 2-year probability of presenting SR was significantly higher in LDLT compared to CLT (45% vs. 22%, P = .019). By univariate analysis LDLT (P = .019) and an ALT higher than 80 IU/L 3 months after LT (P = .022) were predictors of SR. In 93 patients from whom a liver biopsy was available 3 months after LT, a lobular necroinflammatory score >1 (P < .01), LDLT (P < .01), and biliary complications (P = .046) were associated with SR. However, the only variables independently associated with SR were LDLT (odds ratio [OR], = 2.8; 95% CI,1.19-6.6; P = .024) and a lobular necroinflammatory score > 1 (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8; P = .013). In conclusion, HCV recurrence is more severe in LDLT compared to CLT. Although our results were based on a single-center experience, they should be considered in the decision-making process of transplant programs, since severe HCV recurrence may ultimately compromise graft and patient survival.