Survival Outcome After Hepatic Retransplantation for Hepatitis C Virus–Positive and –Negative Recipients

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 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.

Biliary complications adversely affect patient and graft survival after liver retransplantation

Inferior outcomes are consistently observed for recipients of liver retransplantation (re-LT) versus recipients of primary transplants. Few studies have examined the incidence and impact of biliary complications (BCs) on outcomes after re-LT. The aim of this study was to compare patient and graft survival for re-LT recipients with BCs (BC(+) ) and re-LT recipients without BCs (BC(-) ). Additional aims were to determine the impact of biliary reconstruction on the incidence of BCs and to identify risk factors for BCs after re-LT. A single-center, retrospective analysis of all re-LT recipients over a decade was performed. Univariate analyses were performed, and survival was compared with the log-rank method. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of death and graft failure. The BC rate was 20.9% (n = 23) for 110 re-LT cases. The average follow-up was 55 months. The survival rates for BC(-) recipients at 3 months and 1, 3, and 5 years were 95.3%, 91.7%, 85.4%, and 80.9%, respectively, whereas BC(+) patients had survival rates of 64.3%, 49.7%, 34.8%, and 29.8%, respectively (P < 0.001, log-rank). The graft survival rates at 3 months and 1, 3, and 5 years were 92.0%, 88.5%, 82.4%, and 78.0%, respectively, for the BC(-) group and 60.9%, 43.5%, 30.4%, and 26.1%, respectively, for the BC(+) group (P < 0.001, log-rank). BCs, a length of stay ≥ 12 days, and donor age were strongly associated with death and graft failure in a regression analysis, whereas retransplant indications other than chronic rejection and recurrent disease also affected graft failure. In conclusion, BCs significantly affected both patient and graft survival, with an increased risk of death and graft loss among BC(+) recipients. Early recognition, appropriate interventions, and preventative measures for BCs are critical in the clinical management of re-LT recipients.

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.