Rescue of a Marginal Liver Graft by Sequential Treatment With Molecular Adsorbent Recirculating System and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: A Case Report

Child-to-Adult Liver Transplantation With Donation After Cardiac Death Donors: Three Case Reports

Development of organ transplantation is restricted by the discrepancy between the lack of donors and increasing number of patients. The outcome of pediatric donors transplanted into adult recipients especially with donation after circulatory death (DCD) pattern has not been well studied. The aim of this paper is to describe our experience of 3 successful DCD donor child-to-adult liver transplantations lately. Three DCD donors were separately 7, 5, and 8 years old. The ratio between donor graft weight and recipient body weight was 1.42%, 1.00%, and 1.33%, respectively. Ratio between the volume of donor liver and the expected liver volume was 0.65, 0.46, and 0.60. Splenectomy was undertaken for the second recipient according to the portal vein pressure (PVP) which was observed during the operation. Two out of 3 of the recipients suffered with acute kidney injury and got recovered after renal replacement therapy. The first recipient also went through early allograft dysfunction and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The hospital course of the third recipient was uneventful. After 1 year of follow-up visit, the first and second recipients maintain good quality of life and liver function. The third patient was followed up for 5 months until now and recovered well. DCD child-to-adult liver transplantation should only be used for comparatively matched donor and recipient. PVP should be monitored during the operation. The short-term efficacy is good, but long-term follow-up and clinical study with large sample evaluation are still needed.

Septuagenarian and octogenarian donors provide excellent liver grafts for transplantation

BACKGROUND

Wider utilization of liver grafts from donors ≥ 70 years old could substantially expand the organ pool, but their use remains limited by fear of poorer outcomes. We examined the results at our center of liver transplantation (OLT) using livers from donors ≥ 70 years old.

METHODS

From February 2003 to August 2010, we performed 450 OLT including 58 (13%) using donors ≥ 70 whose outcomes were compared with those using donors <70 years old.

RESULTS

Cerebrovascular causes of death predominated among donors ≥ 70 (85% vs 47% in donors <70; P < .001). In contrast, traumatic causes of death predominated among donors <70 (36% vs 14% in donors ≥ 70; P = .002). Unlike grafts from donors <70 years old, grafts from older individuals had no additional risk factors (steatosis, high sodium, or hemodynamic instability). Both groups were comparable for cold and warm ischemia times. No difference was noted in posttransplant peak transaminases, incidence of primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary strictures, or retransplantation rates between groups. The 1- and 5-year patient survivals were 88% and 82% in recipients of livers <70 versus 90% and 84% in those from ≥ 70 years old (P = .705). Recipients of older grafts, who were 6 years older than recipients of younger grafts (P < .001), tended to have a lower laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P = .074).

CONCLUSIONS

Short and mid-term survival following OLT using donors ≥ 70 yo can be excellent provided that there is adequate donor and recipient selection. Septuagenarians and octogenarians with cerebrovascular ischemic and bleeding accidents represent a large pool of potential donors whose wider use could substantially reduce mortality on the OLT waiting list.

Artificial liver support devices as treatment option for liver failure

Non-biological artificial liver support (ALS) devices aim to remove albumin-bound and water-soluble toxins arising as a result of liver failure. They do not directly improve the liver synthetic capacity. The currently most used devices combine haemodialysis with albumin dialysis (MARS) or plasma separation and filtration (Prometheus). These devices have been used as a treatment for different types of liver failure: acute liver failure, acute-on-chronic liver failure and primary non- or poor-function after liver transplantation. Overall these devices are found to be safe. The following beneficial effects have been documented: improvement of jaundice, amelioration of haemodynamic instability, reduction of portal hypertension, lowering of intracranial pressure and improvement of hepatic encephalopathy. However, recently multicentre controlled trials failed to show a beneficial effect on transplant-free survival. Therefore the use of these devices at present seems only justified as a bridge to liver transplantation.