Safe use of livers from deceased donors older than 70 years in recipients with HCV cirrhosis treated with direct-action antivirals. Retrospective cohort study

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.

Post-transplant biliary complications using liver grafts from deceased donors older than 70 years: Retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

The shortage of liver grafts and subsequent waitlist mortality led us to expand the donor pool using liver grafts from older donors.

AIM

To determine the incidence, outcomes, and risk factors for biliary complications (BC) in liver transplantation (LT) using liver grafts from donors aged > 70 years.

METHODS

Between January 1994 and December 31, 2019, 297 LTs were performed using donors older than 70 years. After excluding 47 LT for several reasons, we divided 250 LTs into two groups, namely post-LT BC (n = 21) and without BC (n = 229). This retrospective case-control study compared both groups.

RESULTS

Choledocho-choledochostomy without T-tube was the most frequent technique (76.2% in the BC group vs 92.6% in the non-BC group). Twenty-one patients (8.4%) developed BC (13 anastomotic strictures, 7 biliary leakages, and 1 non-anastomotic biliary stricture). Nine patients underwent percutaneous balloon dilation and nine required a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy because of dilation failure. The incidence of post-LT complications (graft dysfunction, rejection, renal failure, and non-BC reoperations) was similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in the patient and graft survival between the groups. Moreover, only three deaths were attributed to BC. While female donors were protective factors for BC, donor cardiac arrest was a risk factor.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of BC was relatively low on using liver grafts > 70 years. It could be managed in most cases by percutaneous dilation or Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, without significant differences in the patient or graft survival between the groups.

Liver Transplant Recipient Characteristics Associated With Worse Post-Transplant Outcomes in Using Elderly Donors

Advanced age of liver donor is a risk factor for graft loss after transplant. We sought to identify recipient characteristics associated with negative post-liver transplant (LT) outcomes in the context of elderly donors. Using 2014–2019 OPTN/UNOS data, LT recipients were classified by donor age: ≥70, 40–69, and <40 years. Recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were identified and created a risk stratification system and validated it using 2020 OPTN/UNOS data set. At transplant, significant recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were: previous liver transplant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.37, 95%CI 1.98–9.65); mechanical ventilation (aHR 4.28, 95%CI 1.95–9.43); portal thrombus (aHR 1.87, 95%CI 1.26–2.77); serum sodium <125 mEq/L (aHR 2.88, 95%CI 1.34–6.20); and Karnofsky score 10–30% (aHR 2.03, 95%CI 1.13–3.65), 40–60% (aHR 1.65, 95%CI 1.08–2.51). Using those risk factors and multiplying HRs, recipients were divided into low-risk (n = 931) and high-risk (n = 294). Adjusted risk of one-year graft loss in the low-risk recipient group was similar to that of patients with younger donors; results were consistent using validation dataset. Our results show that a system of careful recipient selection can reduce the risks of graft loss associated with older donor age.