Elderly donors for HCV(+) versus non-HCV recipients: patient survival following liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2008;40:792-796. [PMID: 18455019 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.02.069]

Prognostic role of the Donor Risk Index, the Eurotransplant Donor Risk Index, and the Balance of Risk score on graft loss after liver transplantation

This study aimed to identify cutoff values for donor risk index (DRI), Eurotransplant (ET)-DRI, and balance of risk (BAR) scores that predict the risk of liver graft loss. MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched systematically and unrestrictedly. Graft loss odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were assessed by meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel tests with a random-effects model. Cutoff values for predicting graft loss at 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years were analyzed for each of the scores. Measures of calibration and discrimination used in studies validating the DRI and the ET-DRI were summarized. DRI ≥ 1.4 (six studies, n = 35 580 patients) and ET-DRI ≥ 1.4 (four studies, n = 11 666 patients) were associated with the highest risk of graft loss at all time points. BAR > 18 was associated with the highest risk of 3-month and 1-year graft loss (n = 6499 patients). A DRI cutoff of 1.8 and an ET-DRI cutoff of 1.7 were estimated using a summary receiver operator characteristic curve, but the sensitivity and specificity of these cutoff values were low. A DRI and ET-DRI score ≥ 1.4 and a BAR score > 18 have a negative influence on graft survival, but these cutoff values are not well suited for predicting graft loss.

Analyzing predictors of graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation with donors aged 70 years and over

AIM

To increase the number of available grafts.

METHODS

This is a single-center comparative analysis performed between April 1986 and May 2016. Two hundred and twelve liver transplantation (LT) were performed with donors ≥ 70 years old (study group). Then, we selected the first cases that were performed with donors < 70 years old immediately after the ones that were performed with donors ≥ 70 years old (control group).

RESULTS

Graft and patient survivals were similar between both groups without increasing the risk of complications, especially primary non-function, vascular complications and biliary complications. We identified 5 risk factors as independent predictors of graft survival: recipient hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positivity [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.55-3.56; P = 0.00]; recipient age (HR = 1.04; 95%CI: 1.02-1.06; P = 0.00); donor age X model for end-stage liver disease (D-MELD) (HR = 1.00; 95%CI: 1.00-1.00; P = 0.00); donor value of serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (HR = 1.00; 95%CI: 1.00-1.00; P = 0.00); and donor value of serum sodium (HR = 0.96; 95%CI: 0.94-0.99; P = 0.00). After combining D-MELD and recipient age we obtained a new scoring system that we called DR-MELD (donor age X recipient age X MELD). Graft survival significantly decreased in patients with a DR-MELD score ≥ 75000, especially in HCV patients (77% vs 63% at 5 years in HCV-negative patients, P = 0.00; and 61% vs 25% at 5 years in HCV-positive patients; P = 0.00).

CONCLUSION

A DR-MELD ≥ 75000 must be avoided in order to obtain the best results in LT with donors ≥ 70 years old.

Right lobe living donors ages 55 years old and older in liver transplantation

The evidence is insufficient for safe use of elderly donors in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of right lobe LDLT by donor age (≥55 versus < 55 years). All living donors who underwent right hepatectomy at the authors' institution between March 2008 and December 2015 were divided into 2 groups: group A with an age ≥ 55 years and group B with an age of <55 years. The selection criteria for elderly donor were preservation of middle hepatic vein, remnant liver volume ≥30%, and no or mild fatty liver. The matching criteria of recipients for the elderly donor grafts were Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score of <25, graft-to-recipient weight ratio of >0.8%, and body mass index of <25 kg/m² . Perioperative data, complications by the Clavien classification, and the outcomes with at least 12 months follow-up were compared. A total of 42 donors were enrolled in group A and 498 in group B. No significant differences in operative parameters were observed between the 2 groups. The peak postoperative aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin levels made no difference between the 2 groups. The peak international normalized ratio level was significantly lower in group A than in group B (P = 0.001). All donors recovered completely with no significant differences in overall complications between the 2 groups. All recipients of grafts from donors in group A showed good initial function with no significant differences in 1-year graft and patient survival or biliary complications between 2 groups. These results provide clinical evidence for feasibility of right hepatectomy in living donors aged ≥ 55 years without compromising donor safety or recipient outcomes. Liver Transplantation 23 1305-1311 2017 AASLD.

Results of liver transplantation from old donors

INTRODUCTION

Faced with a shortage of organs for liver transplantation, the use of grafts from older donors is justified. However, there remains little consensus on how this use impacts the graft and patient outcomes after transplantation from these older donors. The aim of the present analysis was to assess the graft and patient outcomes after liver transplantation from deceased donors >60 years of age.

METHODS

From January 2007 to January 2011, 505 subjects were identified as liver graft donors after brain death, of which 7.35% were ≥60. To determine the effect of donor age on graft and patient outcomes, we analyzed donor age, recipient age, the Model for End-State Liver Disease (MELD) score of recipients at the time of transplantation, early posttransplant complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

The posttransplant follow-up was 29 ± 25.5 months, and 3-year patient mortality from donors, grouped according to age, was 7.92% with donors <30; 15.78% with donors 30-50, 10.68% with donors 50-60, and 12.50% with donors >60. After analysis of patient and graft survival based on donor graft age, 3-year patient survival according donor age was 89.29% with donors <30, 83.85% with donors 30-50, 89.89% with donors 50-60, and 87.50% with donors >60. Analysis showed overall patient and graft survival rates from older donors were not worse than those from younger donors (P > .1). Among the cases, 3-year patient survival according to MELD score was 91.19% with a MELD of I, 85.37% with a MELD of II, and 67.67% with a MELD of III; differences in graft and patient survival when comparing low MELD I and high MELD III were significantly different (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

A more advanced age of a donor should not be a contraindication for liver transplantation. The present analysis shows that liver grafts from donors >60 can be used safely in older recipients who presented with relatively low MELD scores. Analyses also indicate that high MELD obtained before transplantation may be an important prognostic factor for graft and patient survival.

Outcomes of living donor liver transplantation using elderly donors

Purpose

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using elderly donors is increasing in frequency in response to organ shortage. However, elderly donor graft has been reported to negatively affect graft patency and patient survival.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 604 patients who underwent LDLT at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea between May 1999 and September 2012. Elderly donors were defined as those ≥55 years of age. Here, we evaluate the survival differences and causes of death of recipients of elderly donor grafts.

Results

The overall mortality rate of the recipients was significantly higher in the elderly donor group (group A) than in the younger donor group (group B: 46.2% vs. 18.1%, P = 0.004). The survival length of group A was significantly shorter than that of group B (31.2 ± 31.3 and 51.4 ± 40.8 months, P = 0.014). The significantly common causes of death in group A were biliary (41.7%) and arterial complication (16.7%), and it was higher than those in group B (P = 0.000 and P = 0.043, respectively).

Conclusion

LDLT using elderly donors could induce more serious complications and higher mortality rates than those at using younger donors. As such, careful donor selection is needed, especially with regard to assessing the condition of potential elderly donor livers. Furthermore, a large-volume and multicenter study of complications and outcomes of LDLT using elderly donor liver is required.

Matching donor to recipient in liver transplantation: Relevance in clinical practice

Achieving optimum outcomes after liver transplantation requires an understanding of the interaction between donor, graft and recipient factors. Within the cohort of patients waiting for a transplant, better matching of the donor organ to the recipient will improve transplant outcomes and benefit the overall waiting list by minimizing graft failure and need for re-transplantation. A PubMed search was conducted to identify published literature investigating the effects of donor factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, viral serology; graft factors such as size and quality, recipient factors such as age, size, gender and transplant factors such as major or minor blood group incompatibility and immunological factors. We also report technical and therapeutic modifications that can be used to manage donor-recipient mismatch identified from literature and the authors’ clinical experience. Multiple donor and recipient factors impact graft survival after liver transplantation. Appropriate matching based on donor-organ-recipient variables, modification of surgical technique and innovative peri-transplant strategies can increase the donor pool by utilizing grafts from marginal donors that are traditionally turned down.

Influence of antiviral therapy in the long-term outcome of recurrent hepatitis C virus infection following liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Severity of recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in liver transplant recipients (LTR) is variable and the influence of different factors, including the administration of antiviral therapy in the long-term outcome is controversial.

METHODS

We analyzed the outcome of a cohort of HCV-infected LTR who were transplanted in our institution. Patients were divided into 2 groups (severe and non-severe HCV disease) depending on the presence of a fibrosis score of F ≥ 2 in the Scheuer index and/or fibrosing cholestasic hepatitis (FCH) in a graft biopsy. Risk factors were studied using logistic regression analysis. Survival of patients was estimated using Kaplan-Meier plots. A total of 146 patients were followed for a mean of 58 months.

RESULTS

Fifty-six (34%) patients developed severe HCV disease and showed shorter survival (P < 0.024). Donor age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.06) and pre-transplant viral load (VL) >10(6) UI/mL (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.42-10.61) were the only factors associated with severe HCV infection. Over-immunosuppression (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.2-4.41) was specifically associated with the development of FCH. Overall, patient survival in recipients who received a full course of anti-HCV therapy was higher than in patients who did not complete antiviral therapy (P = 0.004) or received no treatment (P = 0.007). Patients with non-severe HCV infection have a higher probability of receiving a full course of antiviral therapy (P = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, donor age, pre-transplant VL, and over-immunosuppression were associated with the long-term development of severe HCV recurrence in liver grafts. Administration of a full course of antiviral therapy was associated with better survival.

A score predicting survival after liver retransplantation for hepatitis C virus cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Approximately one fourth of patients transplanted for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-induced liver failure progress to cirrhosis within 5 years, potentially requiring retransplantation. Although the relisting decision can be difficult in these patients, a score could help in selection of candidates with the best potential outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 1422 HCV-positive patients having undergone a retransplantation were included in this registry-based study. A multivariate Cox regression was performed, and an Akaike procedure was applied to design a score predicting survival after retransplantation and to allow an internal validation. Retained variables were donor age (DnAge), serum creatinine (Creat), International Normalized Ratio (INR), and serum albumin (Alb) at the second transplantation, recipient age (RecAge) at the first transplantation, and the interval between both transplantations (Int).

RESULTS

The score was designed as 0.23×DnAge+4.86×log Creat-2.45×log Int+2.69×INR+0.10×RecAge-3.27× Alb+40. The receiver operating characteristic area under curve was 0.643 at 3 years, and survivals were 71%, 56%, and 37% for scores <30, 30 to 40, and >40, respectively (log rank <0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the proposed score is specifically designed for HCV-positive patients, accurately predicts survival after a liver retransplantation, and is helpful in the selection of candidates with the best potential outcomes.

Decrease in bone mass in women after liver transplantation: associated factors

BACKGROUND

In the future, an increasing number of female liver transplant recipients will reach the climacteric with osteoporosis as a common complication. We evaluated the factors associated with decreased bone mass among women after liver transplantation.

METHODS

A prospective, cross-sectional study of 23 outpatient transplant recipients followed from February 2009 to March 2010 included women of age ≥35 years after liver transplantations ≥1 year prior. We recorded patient histories, liver enzyme levels, as well as bone mineral densities measured at the lumbar spine and femur. Statistical analysis used Fisher's exact test, simple odds ratio (OR), and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 52.5 ± 11 years with 30.4% premenopausal, and 69.6% perimenopausal or postmenopausal. Approximately 21% showed osteoporosis and 35%, a low bone mass. Postmenopausal women: OR 69.0 (95% CI 2.89-1647.18; P<.0001), aged ≥49 years: OR 13.33 (95% CI 1.78-100.15; P=.0123) and receiving a transplant after 44 years of age: OR 49.50 (95% CI 3.84-638.43; P<.0001) were associated with a lower bone mass. Having undergone transplantation for more than 5.8 years lowered the risk of bone mass change: OR 0.11 (95% CI 0.02-0.78; P=.0361). Clinical and laboratory variables, including corticosteroid use, were not associated with decreased bone mass.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the prevalence and factors associated with osteoporosis among female liver transplant recipients is important to enhance the strategies to diagnose and treat these women, seeking to improve their quality of life.