Management of the Liver Transplant Recipient: Approach to Allograft Dysfunction

Serum Arginine Level for Predicting Early Allograft Dysfunction in Liver Transplantation Recipients by Targeted Metabolomics Analysis: A Prospective, Single-Center Cohort Study

Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) is a frequent phenomenon, leading to increased graft loss and higher mortality after liver transplantation (LT). Despite significant efforts for early diagnosis of EAD, there is no existing approach that can predict EAD on the first post-operative day. The aim is to define a metabolite-based biomarker on the first day after LT complicated with EAD. Ten patients diagnosed with EAD and 26 non-EAD are recruited for the study. A HPLC-MS/MS is used to determine 14 amino acids and 15 bile acids serum concentration. Comparative analyses are conducted between EAD and non-EAD groups. Arginine is identified as the most significant metabolite distinguishing the EAD and non-EAD groups, and therefore, is identified as a potential biomarker of EAD. The optimal cut-off value for arginine is 52.09 µmol L-1, with an AUROC of 0.804 (95% confidence interval: 0.638-0.917, p < 0.001), yielding a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 53.8%, and Youden index of 0.54, NPVof 100%, and PPV of 45.45%. In summary, the study indicated that targeted metabolomics analysis would be a promising strategy for discovering novel biomarkers to predict EAD. The identified arginine may be helpful in developing an objective diagnostic method for EAD.

Algorithmic Approach to Deranged Liver Functions After Transplantation

Liver transplant (LT) recipients require close follow-up with regular monitoring of the liver function tests (LFTs). Evaluation of deranged LFT should be individualized depending upon the time since LT, peri-operative events, clinical course, and any complications. These derangements can range from mild and asymptomatic to severe and symptomatic elevations requiring expedited personalized assessment and management. Pattern of LFT derangement (hepatocellular, cholestatic, or mixed), donor-recipient risk factors, timing after LT (post-operative, 1-12 months, and >12 months since LT) along with clinical context and symptomatology are important considerations before proceeding with the initial evaluation. Compliance to immunosuppression and drug interactions should be ascertained along with local epidemiology of infections. Essential initial evaluation must include an ultrasound abdomen with Doppler to rule out any structural causes such as biliary or vascular complications apart from focussed laboratory evaluation. Early allograft dysfunction, ischemia reperfusion injury, small-for-size syndrome, biliary leaks, hepatic artery, and portal vein thrombosis are usual culprits in the early post-operative period whereas viral hepatitis (acute or reactivation), opportunistic infections, and recurrence of the primary disease are more frequent in the later period. Graft rejection, biliary strictures, sepsis, and drug induced liver injury remain possible etiologies at all times points after LT. Initial evaluation algorithm must be customized based on history, clinical examination, risk factors, and pattern and severity of deranged LFT. Allograft rejection is a diagnosis of exclusion and requires liver biopsy to confirm and assess severity. Empirical treatment of rejection sans liver biopsy is discouraged.

Treatment of maple syrup urine disease: Benefits, risks, and challenges of liver transplantation

Maple syrup urine disease (MSUD) is caused by a deficiency in the activity of the branched-chain α-ketoacid dehydrogenase (BCKD) complex, promoting the accumulation of the branched-chain amino acids (BCAA) leucine, isoleucine, and valine, as well as their respective α-keto acids. MSUD is an autosomal recessive hereditary metabolic disorder characterized by ketoacidosis, ataxia, coma, and mental and psychomotor retardation. The mechanisms involved in the brain damage caused by MSUD are not fully understood. Early diagnosis and treatment, as well as proper control of metabolic decompensation crises, are crucial for patients' survival and for a better prognosis. The recommended treatment consists of a high-calorie diet with restricted protein intake and specific formulas containing essential amino acids, except those accumulated in MSUD. This treatment will be maintained throughout life, being adjusted according to the patients' nutritional needs and BCAA concentration. Because dietary treatment may not be sufficient to prevent neurological damage in MSUD patients, other therapeutic strategies have been studied, including liver transplantation. With transplantation, it is possible to obtain an increase of about 10% of the normal BCKD in the body, an amount sufficient to maintain amino acid homeostasis and reduce metabolic decompensation crises. However, the experience related to this practice is very limited when considering the shortage of liver for transplantation and the risks related to the surgical procedure and immunosuppression. Thus, the purpose of this review is to survey the benefits, risks, and challenges of liver transplantation in the treatment of MSUD.

Identification of High-Mobility Group Box 1 (HMGB1) Expression as a Potential Predictor of Rejection and Poor Prognosis After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND Acute cellular rejection (ACR) frequently occurs after liver transplantation (LT) and can result in permanent damage of the liver allograft. Specific and sensitive biomarkers for predicting and monitoring ACR are vital for guiding post-transplantation care. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the function of high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) in predicting ACR and prognosis after LT. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 113 LT recipients were enrolled in the study, including 62 patients in an ACR group and 51 patients in a non-rejection group. Using tissues from the 113 patients, HMGB1 expression was examined by immunohistochemistry, and the total score for HMGB1 expression was calculated by multiplying the percentage of immunoreactive cells score and the staining intensity score. We then analyzed the association between HMGB1 expression and clinical features. Finally, the function of HMGB1 in predicting the prognosis of LT was determined using Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival and Cox multivariate analyses. RESULTS Immunohistochemical staining results demonstrated that the expression of HMGB1 was significantly increased in the ACR group, compared with that in the non-rejection group (P<0.05). Clinical characteristic analysis revealed that high HMGB1 levels were related to ACR (P<0.05). Moreover, K-M survival analysis showed that patients with high HMGB1 expression displayed poorer prognosis (P<0.05). Cox multivariate analysis demonstrated that HMGB1 was an independent prognostic predictor for post-LT survival (odds ratio, 3.283; P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS LT recipients' HMGB1 levels may be a useful and noninvasive biomarker for the prediction of ACR and prognosis after LT.

Fecal Microbiome Data Distinguish Liver Recipients With Normal and Abnormal Liver Function From Healthy Controls

Emerging evidence suggests that altered intestinal microbiota plays an important role in the pathogenesis of many liver diseases, mainly by promoting inflammation via the “intestinal microbiota-immunity-liver” axis. We aimed to investigate the fecal microbiome of liver recipients with abnormal/normal liver function using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Fecal samples were collected from 90 liver recipients [42 with abnormal liver function (Group LT_A) and 48 with normal liver function (Group LT_N)] and 61 age- and gender-matched healthy controls (HCs). Fecal microbiomes were analyzed for comparative composition, diversity, and richness of microbial communities. Principal coordinates analysis successfully distinguished the fecal microbiomes of recipients in Group LT_A from healthy subjects, with the significant decrease of fecal microbiome diversity in recipients in Group LT_A. Other than a higher relative abundance of opportunistic pathogens such as Klebsiella and Escherichia/Shigella in all liver recipients, the main difference in gut microbiome composition between liver recipients and HC was the lower relative abundance of beneficial butyrate-producing bacteria in the recipients. Importantly, we established a fecal microbiome index (specific alterations in Staphylococcus and Prevotella) that could be used to distinguish Group LT_A from Group LT_N, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value of 0.801 and sensitivity and specificity values of 0.771 and 0.786, respectively. These findings revealed unique gut microbial characteristics of liver recipients with abnormal and normal liver functions, and identified fecal microbial risk indicators of abnormal liver function in liver recipients.