Model for end-stage liver disease dynamic stratification of survival benefit

Obesity as predictor of postoperative outcomes in liver transplant candidates: Review of the literature and future perspectives

BACKGROUND

Current American and European guidelines consider a pre-transplant BMI ≥40kg/m² as a relative contraindication for liver transplantation but this recommendation is graded as uncertain and requires further research. Moreover, conflicting results are reported on the predictive value of BMI 30-39.9kg/m² on post-transplant complication and mortality risk.

AIM

This study analyzed the data of the literature on the effect of all three BMI classes of obesity on postoperative outcomes in liver transplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A PubMed and Cochrane Library search was conducted from inception to October 2015.

RESULTS

Analysis of the literature demonstrates that discrepancies among studies are mainly either due to limitations of BMI per se, the different BMI cut-offs used to select patients with obesity or reference group and the different outcomes considered. Moreover, the evaluation of visceral adipose tissue and the detrimental effect of muscle mass reduction in presence of obesity are never considered.

CONCLUSIONS

BMI assessment should be used as a preliminary method to evaluate obesity. Subsequently, the assessment of visceral adipose tissue and muscle mass should complete the preoperative evaluation of liver transplant candidates. This innovative approach could represent a new field of research in liver transplantation.

Avoiding Futility in Simultaneous Liver-kidney Transplantation: Analysis of 331 Consecutive Patients Listed for Dual Organ Replacement

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate outcomes and predictors of renal allograft futility (RAF-patient death or need for renal replacement therapy at 3 months) after simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT).

BACKGROUND

Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) prioritization of liver recipients with renal dysfunction has significantly increased utilization of SLKT. Data on renal outcomes after SLKT in the highest MELD recipients are scarce, as are accurate predictors of recovery of native kidney function. Without well-established listing guidelines, SLKT potentially wastes renal allografts in both high-acuity liver recipients at risk for early mortality and recipients who may regain native kidney function.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center multivariate regression analysis was performed for adult patients undergoing SLKT (January 2004 to August 2014) to identify predictors of RAF.

RESULTS

Of 331 patients dual-listed for SLKT, 171 (52%) expired awaiting transplant, 145 (44%) underwent SLKT, and 15 (5%) underwent liver transplantation alone. After SLKT, 39% experienced delayed graft function and 20.7% had RAF. Compared with patients without RAF, RAF recipients had greater MELD scores, length of hospitalization, intraoperative base deficit, incidence of female donors, kidney and liver donor risk indices, kidney cold ischemia, and inferior overall survival. Multivariate predictors of RAF included pretransplant dialysis duration, kidney cold ischemia, kidney donor risk index, and recipient hyperlipidemia.

CONCLUSIONS

With 20% short-term loss of transplanted kidneys after SLKT, our data strongly suggest that renal transplantation should be deferred in liver recipients at high risk for RAF. Consideration for a kidney allocation variance to allow for delayed renal transplantation after liver transplantation may prevent loss of scarce renal allografts.

Diagnostic and therapeutic management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an increasing health problem, representing the second cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The major risk factor for HCC is cirrhosis. In developing countries, viral hepatitis represent the major risk factor, whereas in developed countries, the epidemic of obesity, diabetes and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis contribute to the observed increase in HCC incidence. Cirrhotic patients are recommended to undergo HCC surveillance by abdominal ultrasounds at 6-mo intervals. The current diagnostic algorithms for HCC rely on typical radiological hallmarks in dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, while the use of α-fetoprotein as an independent tool for HCC surveillance is not recommended by current guidelines due to its low sensitivity and specificity. Early diagnosis is crucial for curative treatments. Surgical resection, radiofrequency ablation and liver transplantation are considered the cornerstones of curative therapy, while for patients with more advanced HCC recommended options include sorafenib and trans-arterial chemo-embolization. A multidisciplinary team, consisting of hepatologists, surgeons, radiologists, oncologists and pathologists, is fundamental for a correct management. In this paper, we review the diagnostic and therapeutic management of HCC, with a focus on the most recent evidences and recommendations from guidelines.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary tumor of the liver and is considered an aggressive tumor with mean survival estimated between 6 and 20 months. Hepatitis B and C are the most common etiologies. Pathological, laboratory and radiologic imaging all aid in diagnosis but much controversy exists in the utilization of any given modality. Many treatment options exist for management of HCC, each has its own limitation. Liver transplantation offers the most reasonable expectation for curative treatment while simultaneously removing the burden of the diseased liver. Still, advancements in the field have thus far not yet matched its potential, although new immunosuppressive and chemotherapy regimen may allow transplantation to push the envelope once again.

Portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation: implications for waiting list period, surgical approach, early and late follow-up

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a well-known and relatively common complication of liver cirrhosis. In the past, PVT was considered as a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT). To characterize prevalence, risk factors, perioperative management and outcome of PVT in the setting of LT, the English literature published between 1991 and 2011 was reviewed. Of 6807 articles, 280 were selected, and 39 experiences were analyzed in detail (methodology, type and duration of treatments, peri-operative management, strategy to avoid recurrence, strengths and weaknesses, Oxford evidence level, citations). 3/39 studies were prospective; 9/39 were based on prospectively recorded databases; no studies of 1, 2a, 3a level of evidence were present; 5/39 were recognized as level 2b, 23/39 as level 3b, and 8/39 as level 4. High complication rate has been reported with consequent effect on graft and patient survival. Overall, PVT presents today good results similar to those obtained in patients without PVT undergoing LT even if they require a higher transfusion number and a longer ICU/hospital stay. Reported cases were retrospectively stratified according to Yerdel classification. Grade 1-2 patients (76%) do well with eversion thromboendovenectomy, resection of damaged vein and porto-portal anastomosis. Results of patients with grade 3-4 (24%) are inferior, however data on outcome in this subsets are fragmented and do not allow a reliable analysis. Moreover, results obtained in grade 3-4 cases are better in transplant centers with large specific experience. The small number of reports suggests caution. The role of anticoagulant treatment is still debated. Although in cirrhotics with PVT LT remains a demanding procedure, PVT should not be considered a contraindication anymore.

Bridging and downstaging treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation

Several therapeutic procedures have been proposed as bridging treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation (LT). The most used treatments include transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation. Surgical resection has also been successfully used as a bridging procedure, and LT should be considered a rescue treatment in patients with previous HCC resection who experience tumor recurrence or post-treatment severe decompensation of liver function. The aims of bridging treatments include decreasing the waiting list dropout rate before transplantation, reducing HCC recurrence after transplantation, and improving post-transplant overall survival. To date, no data from prospective randomized studies are available; however, for HCC patients listed for LT within the Milan criteria, prolonging the waiting time over 6-12 mo is a risk factor for tumor spread. Bridging treatments are useful in containing tumor progression and decreasing dropout. Furthermore, the response to pre-LT treatments may represent a surrogate marker of tumor biological aggressiveness and could therefore be evaluated to prioritize HCC candidates for LT. Lastly, although a definitive conclusion can not be reached, the experiences reported to date suggest a positive impact of these treatments on both tumor recurrence and post-transplant patient survival. Advanced HCC may be downstaged to achieve and maintain the current conventional criteria for inclusion in the waiting list for LT. Recent studies have demonstrated that successfully downstaged patients can achieve a 5-year survival rate comparable to that of patients meeting the conventional criteria without requiring downstaging.

Incidence, management, and results of hepatic artery stenosis after liver transplantation in the era of donor to recipient match

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic artery stenosis (HAS) is an important complication after liver transplantation. However, studies are not conclusive in terms of definition, incidence, best treatment, and timing of intervention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of SSHA that occurred in a single center over the past 12 years, pointing out diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

METHODS

The incidence of HAS was reviewed in 258 liver transplant recipients between January 1999 and December 2011. All patients underwent Doppler ultrasound (DUS) at fixed times. Multidetector computed tomographic angiography (MDCTA) was performed to confirm the DUS findings.

RESULTS

HAS occurred in 23 cases (9.3%). In all cases diagnosis was performed by DUS resulting in a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 99.6%. Based on DUS and MDCTA data integration, in 10 cases we adopted the "wait and see" strategy, whereas 13 patients underwent interventional radiology techniques.

CONCLUSION

DUS monitoring is efficacious in the diagnosis of HAS after liver transplantation. Interventional radiology procedures are safe and efficacious.