Retransplantation of the liver: review of current literature for decision making and technical considerations

LIVER RETRANSPLANTATION: PROGNOSTIC SCORES AND RESULTS IN THE STATE OF PARANÁ

BACKGROUND

Hepatic retransplantation is associated with higher morbidity and mortality when compared to primary transplantation. Given the scarcity of organs and the need for efficient allocation, evaluating parameters that can predict post-retransplant survival is crucial.

AIMS

This study aimed to analyze prognostic scores and outcomes of hepatic retransplantation.

METHODS

Data on primary transplants and retransplants carried out in the state of Paraná in 2019 and 2020 were analyzed. The two groups were compared based on 30-day survival and the main prognostic scores of the donor and recipient, namely Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), MELD-albumin (MELD-a), Donor MELD (D-MELD), Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation (SOFT), Preallocation Score to Predict Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation (P-SOFT), and Balance of Risk (BAR).

RESULTS

A total of 425 primary transplants and 30 retransplants were included in the study. The main etiology of hepatopathy in primary transplantation was ethylism (n=140; 31.0%), and the main reasons for retransplantation were primary graft dysfunction (n=10; 33.3%) and hepatic artery thrombosis (n=8; 26.2%). The 30-day survival rate was higher in primary transplants than in retransplants (80.5% vs. 36.7%, p=0.001). Prognostic scores were higher in retransplants than in primary transplants: MELD 30.6 vs. 20.7 (p=0.001); MELD-a 31.5 vs. 23.5 (p=0.001); D-MELD 1234.4 vs. 834.0 (p=0.034); SOFT 22.3 vs. 8.2 (p=0.001); P-SOFT 22.2 vs. 7.8 (p=0.001); and BAR 15.6 vs. 8.3 (p=0.001). No difference was found in terms of Donor Risk Index (DRI).

CONCLUSIONS

Retransplants exhibited lower survival rates at 30 days, as predicted by prognostic scores, but unrelated to the donor's condition.

Subjective Difficulty Scale in Liver Transplantation: A Prospective Observational Study

The predictive value of a subjective difficulty scale (DS) after surgical procedures is unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of a DS after liver transplantation (LT) and to identify predictors of difficulty. Surgeons prospectively evaluated the difficulty of 441 consecutive liver transplantations from donation after brain death at the end of the surgery by using a DS from 0 to 10 (“the easiest to the hardest you can imagine”). DS was associated with severe morbidity. The risk of graft loss at 1 year remained unchanged from 0 to 6 but increased beyond 6. Graft survival and patient survival of group with DS 7–10 was significantly impaired compared to groups with DS: 0–3 or DS: 4–6 but were significantly impaired for the group with DS: 7–10. Independent predictors of difficult LT (DS ≥ 7) were annular segment 1, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, retransplantation beyond 30 days, portal vein thrombosis, and ascites. Of them, ascites was a borderline non-significant covariate (p = .04). Vascular complications occurred more often after difficult LT (20.5% vs. 5.9%), whereas there was no difference in the other types of complications. DS can be used to tailor monitoring and anticipate early complications. External validation is needed.

Serum Glycomics on Postoperative Day 7 Are Associated With Graft Loss Within 3 Months After Liver Transplantation Regardless of Early Allograft Dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Prediction of outcome after liver transplantation (LT) is limited by the lack of robust predictors of graft failure. In this prospective study, we aimed to define a serum glycomic signature in the first week after LT that is associated with graft loss at 3 mo after LT.

METHODS

Patients were included between January 1, 2011, and February 28, 2017. Glycomic analysis was performed using DNA sequencer-associated fluorophore-associated capillary electrophoresis on a serum sample 1 wk after LT. Making use of Lasso regression, an optimal glycomic signature was identified associated with 3-mo graft survival.

RESULTS

In this cohort of 131 patients, graft loss at 3 mo occurred in 14 patients (11.9%). The optimal mode, called the GlycoTransplantTest, yielded an area under the curve of 0.95 for association with graft loss at 3 mo. Using an optimized cutoff for this biomarker, sensitivity was 86% and specificity 89%. Negative predictive value was 98%. Odds ratio for graft loss at 3 mo was 70.211 (P < 0.001; 95% confidence interval, 10.876-453.231).

CONCLUSIONS

A serum glycomic signature is highly associated with graft loss at 3 mo. It could support decision making in early retransplantation.

Association between hospital liver transplantation volume and mortality after liver re-transplantation

BACKGROUND

The relationship between institutional liver transplantation (LT) case volume and clinical outcomes after liver re-transplantation is yet to be determined.

METHODS

Patients who underwent liver re-transplantation between 2007 and 2016 were selected from the Korean National Healthcare Insurance Service database. Liver transplant centers were categorized to either high-volume centers (≥ 64 LTs/year) or low-volume centers (< 64 LTs/year) according to the annual LT case volume. In-hospital and long-term mortality after liver re-transplantation were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 258 liver re-transplantations were performed during the study period: 175 liver re-transplantations were performed in 3 high-volume centers and 83 were performed in 21 low-volume centers. In-hospital mortality after liver re-transplantation in high and low-volume centers were 25% and 36% (P = 0.069), respectively. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was not different between low and high-volume centers. Adjusted 1-year mortality was significantly higher in low-volume centers (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.05-4.37, P = 0.037) compared to high-volume centers. Long-term survival for up to 9 years was also superior in high-volume centers (P = 0.005). Other risk factors of in-hospital mortality and 1-year mortality included female sex and higher Elixhauser comorbidity index.

CONCLUSION

Centers with higher case volume (≥ 64 LTs/year) showed lower in-hospital and overall mortality after liver re-transplantation compared to low-volume centers.

Retransplantation After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Data from the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Study

BACKGROUND

The use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for primary liver transplantation (LT) may quell concerns about allocating deceased donor organs if the need for retransplantation (re-LT) arises because the primary LT did not draw from the limited organ pool. However, outcomes of re-LT after LDLT are poorly studied. The purpose of this study was to analyze the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Study (A2ALL) data to report outcomes of re-LT after LDLT, with a focus on long-term survival after re-LT.

METHODS

A retrospective review of A2ALL data collected between 1998 and 2014 was performed. Patients were excluded if they received a deceased donor LT. Demographic data, postoperative outcomes and complications, graft and patient survival, and predictors of re-LT and patient survival were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 1065 patients who underwent LDLT during the study time period, 110 recipients (10.3%) required re-LT. In multivariable analyses, hepatitis C virus, longer length of stay at LDLT, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary stricture, infection, and disease recurrence were associated with an increased risk of re-LT. Patient survival among re-LT patients was significantly inferior to those who underwent primary transplant only at 1 (86% versus 92%), 5 (64% versus 82%), and 10 years (44% versus 68%).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 10% of A2ALL patients who underwent primary LDLT required re-LT. Compared with patients who underwent primary LT, survival among re-LT recipients was worse at 1, 5, and 10 years after LT, and re-LT was associated with a significantly increased risk of death in multivariable modeling (hazard ratios, 2.29; P < 0.001).

HLA matching and rabbit antithymocyte globulin as induction therapy to avoid multiple forms of rejection after a third liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Despite immunosuppressive drug regimens, T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection with donor-specific antibodies, and chronic rejection occur after liver transplantation (LTx). Rejection may significantly impact allograft survival and often a standard re-LTx is required. However, in some cases rejection recurs. Little is known on how to approach this and which aspects to consider.

CASE

Here we describe a case in which two successive liver grafts where lost due to T cell-mediated rejection, possible antibody-mediated rejection with de novo donor-specific antibody formation, and chronic rejection that occurred within a month. In an attempt to avoid recurrence with the third graft, we decided to administer a more rigorous immunosuppressive drug induction regimen with rabbit antithymocyte globulin, while applying HLA matching between recipient and donor. This resulted in rejection free survival for 337 days until a mild T cell-mediated rejection occurred, which could then be easily treated with high dose steroids. Graft survival is now at least 683 days without chronic rejection, antibody-mediated rejection or de novo donor-specific antibody formation.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, when a liver graft is lost due to multiple forms of rejection short after LTx, the combination applied in this case could be considered as a viable option to improve graft and patient survival instead of a standard re-LTx.

Initial piggyback technique facilitates late liver retransplantation - a retrospective monocentric study

Optimal management of inferior vena cava (IVC) is crucial to ensure safety in late liver retransplantation (ReLT). The aim of this study was to evaluate different surgical strategies with regard to IVC in late ReLT. All consecutive late ReLT (≥90 days from the previous transplant) from 2013 to 2018 in a single center was reviewed (n = 66). Of them, 46 (69.7%) were performed without venovenous bypass (VVB) including 29 with caval preservation (CP) and 17 with caval replacement (CR). The remaining 20 cases (30.3%) required the use of VVB. Among ReLT without VVB, CP was associated with a lower number of packed red blood cells (median 4 vs. 7; P = 0.016) and a lower incidence of post-transplant acute kidney injury (6.9% vs. 47.1%; P = 0.003). The feasibility of CP was 95% (14/15) in patients with previous 3-vein piggyback caval anastomosis versus 48.3% (15/31) after other techniques (P = 0.003). Indirect signs of portal hypertension (PHT) before retransplantation were predictive of VVB requirement. Early and long-term outcomes were similar across the three groups (CP without VVB, CR without VVB, and VVB). Preserving the IVC in late ReLT is associated with better postoperative renal function and is facilitated by a previous 3-vein piggyback. Routine CR is not justified in late ReLT.

Selected liver grafts from donation after circulatory death can be safely used for retransplantation - a multicenter retrospective study

Due to the growing number of liver transplantations (LTs), there is an increasing number of patients requiring retransplantation (reLT). Data on the use of grafts from extended criteria donors (ECD), especially donation after circulatory death (DCD), for reLT are lacking. We aimed to assess the outcome of patients undergoing reLT using a DCD graft in the Netherlands between 2001 and July 2018. Propensity score matching was used to match each DCD-reLT with three DBD-reLT cases. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival. Secondary outcome was the incidence of biliary complications, especially nonanastomotic strictures (NAS). 21 DCD-reLT were compared with 63 matched DBD-reLTs. Donors in the DCD-reLT group had a significantly lower BMI (22.4 vs. 24.7 kg/m² , P-value = 0.02). Comparison of recipient demographics and ischemia times yielded no significant differences. Patient and graft survival rates were comparable between the two groups. However, the occurrence of nonanastomotic strictures after DCD-reLT was significantly higher (38.1% vs. 12.7%, P-value = 0.02). ReLT with DCD grafts does not result in inferior patient and graft survival compared with DBD grafts in selected patients. Therefore, DCD liver grafts should not routinely be declined for patients awaiting reLT.

Complex liver retransplantation to treat graft loss due to long-term biliary tract complication after liver transplantation: A case report

BACKGROUND

Loss of graft function after liver transplantation (LT) inevitably requires liver retransplant. Retransplantation of the liver (ReLT) remains controversial because of inferior outcomes compared with the primary orthotopic LT (OLT). Meanwhile, if accompanied by vascular complications such as arterial and portal vein (PV) stenosis or thrombosis, it will increase difficulties of surgery. We hereby introduce our center's experience in ReLT through a complicated case of ReLT.

CASE SUMMARY

We report a patient who suffered from hepatitis B-associated cirrhosis and underwent LT in December 2012. Early postoperative recovery was uneventful. Four months after LT, the patient’s bilirubin increased significantly and he was diagnosed with an ischemic-type biliary lesion caused by hepatic artery occlusion. The patient underwent percutaneous transhepatic cholangial drainage and repeatedly replaced intrahepatic biliary drainage tube regularly for 5 years. The patient developed progressive deterioration of liver function and underwent liver re-transplant in January 2019. The operation was performed in a classic OLT manner without venous bypass. Both the hepatic artery and PV were occluded and could not be used for anastomosis. The donor PV was anastomosed with the recipient’s left renal vein. The donor hepatic artery was connected to the recipient’s abdominal aorta. The bile duct reconstruction was performed in an end-to-end manner. The postoperative process was very uneventful and the patient was discharged 1 mo after retransplantation.

CONCLUSION

With the development of surgical techniques, portal thrombosis and arterial occlusion are no longer contraindications for ReLT.

Liver retransplantation in adult recipients: analysis of a 38-year experience in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Liver retransplantation (re-LT) accounts for up to 22% after primary liver transplantation (LT), and using donor livers for retransplantation can only be justified by successful outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 2,387 adult recipients with 2,778 LT, between 1979 and 2017, were analyzed to determine risk factors and outcome of re-LT in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Of 2,778 LT, 336 (12.1%) were first, 43 (1.5%) were second, and 12 (0.5%) were third or fourth re-LT. The 5-year patient survival for primary LT, and first, second, and third or fourth re-LT were 74.0%, 70.8%, 63.3%, and 57.1%, respectively (P = 0.10). Recipient age (≤60 years) (OR 1.96, P < 0.001), era (1979-2006) (OR 1.56, P = 0.003), donor after circulatory death (DCD) (OR 1.96, P < 0.001), and cold ischemia time (CIT) (>9 h) (OR 1.42, P = 0.007) were significant risk factors for retransplantation after primary LT.

CONCLUSIONS

Recipient age, era, DCD, and prolonged CIT were identified as parameters for retransplantation. The outcome after the first re-LT was good, and comparable to those of primary transplants. Survival after multiple re-LT was not significantly different from the first retransplant group, legitimizing third and fourth re-LT to well-selected patients.

VI consensus document by the Spanish Liver Transplantation Society

The goal of the Spanish Liver Transplantation Society (La Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático) is to promote and create consensus documents about current topics in liver transplantation with a multidisciplinary approach. To this end, on October 20, 2016, the 6th Consensus Document Meeting was held, with the participation of experts from the 24 authorized Spanish liver transplantation programs. This Edition discusses the following subjects, whose summary is offered below: 1) limits of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation; 2) limits of elective liver re-transplantation; and 3) liver transplantation after resection and hepatocellular carcinoma with factors for a poor prognosis. The consensus conclusions for each of these topics is provided below.

VI consensus document by the Spanish Liver Transplantation Society

The goal of the Spanish Liver Transplantation Society (La Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático) is to promote and create consensus documents about current topics in liver transplantation with a multidisciplinary approach. To this end, on October 20, 2016, the 6th Consensus Document Meeting was held, with the participation of experts from the 24 authorized Spanish liver transplantation programs. This Edition discusses the following subjects, whose summary is offered below: 1) limits of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation; 2) limits of elective liver re-transplantation; and 3) liver transplantation after resection and hepatocellular carcinoma with factors for a poor prognosis. The consensus conclusions for each of these topics is provided below.

Limited impact of pre-existing donor specific HLA-antibodies (DSA) on long term allograft survival after first adult liver transplantation

The relevance of pre-existing HLA-antibodies (HLA-Ab) in liver transplantation (LTx) is controversial. While livers are allocated without HLA match or preoperative crossmatch testing, several studies point to an impact of donor specific antibodies (DSA) for acute rejection, bile duct complications or even graft loss. To investigate the role of DSA in long term liver allograft survival we analysed 177 pre transplant sera of first LTx patients with Luminex single antigen technology defining a MFI of >1500 as positive. The analyses were done retrospectively, and the DSA results had no impact on graft acceptance or patients' therapy. Three year follow up was available for all patients. 77% of our patients had any HLA-Ab pre transplantation, 55 patients were transplanted with DSA by chance. Acute rejections or ischemic type bile duct lesions (ITBL) were not higher in the DSA group, but ITBL was associated with a higher donor age. There was no difference in long term graft function or survival in patients without HLA-Ab, with non DSA or with DSA (p = 0.712). We suggest that determination of pre-existing DSA in first LTx recipients is not appropriate and we conclude that pre-existing DSA in first LTx patients are not a contraindication for liver transplantation.

Analysis of Indications and Results in Liver Retransplantation: Is Late Retransplantation Worthwhile?

BACKGROUND

Liver retransplantation (LrT) is the only therapeutic option for irreversible hepatic graft failure. Despite various improvements, its technical complexity entails a greater morbidity in the short and long term. The main goal of the study was to analyze the activity of LrT at our center, as well as its indications, timing, postoperative evolution, and the long-term survival of patients.

METHODS

We designed a descriptive study of a cohort of patients who underwent LrT in a Spanish Hepatic Transplant Unit, between April 1, 2002 and December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 366 primary orthotopic liver transplantations were performed, 20 of which were LrTs, resulting in a 5.5% retransplantation rate. The most frequent indication for LrT was hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) (35%). Twenty-five percent of the LrTs were early retransplantations and 75% were late retransplantations. After LrT, 35% of the grafts showed liver dysfunction. The overall mortality rate was 45%: in early LrT this was 25% and in late LrT it was 46.7%. Graft actuarial survival at 1 month post-LrT was 75% and at 5 years it was 63.6%. The overall actuarial survival after LrT at month 1, year 1, year 3, and year 5 was 80%, 69.6%, 58.9%, and 50.5%, respectively. In the late LrT group, the results proved less favorable, so it is necessary to define the minimum acceptable result before proceeding to a second graft.

CONCLUSION

Our LrT rate was lower than that reported by other groups in our country. The actuarial survival rates for graft and patient are comparable to those obtained by other groups.

A matched pair analysis of multicenter longterm follow-up after split-liver transplantation with extended right grafts

Split-liver transplantation has been proposed as an alternative to whole liver (WL) transplantation to expand the donor pool, but studies comparing adult longterm outcomes between the 2 methods are conflicting and limited. This is the first Italian multicenter study that retrospectively analyzed 119 matched-pair recipients of whole and extended right grafts (ERGs) for longterm survival outcomes. In the overall population, WL recipients showed higher patient survival at 1 (93% versus 73%), 5 (87% versus 65%), and 10 years (83% versus 60%) after transplantation compared with split-liver recipients (P < 0.001); graft survivals of WL recipients were also superior at 1 (90% versus 76%), 5 (84% versus 57%), and 10 years (81% versus 52%) posttransplant (P < 0.001). However, among the 81 matched pairs that survived the first posttransplant year, 5- and 10-year patient survivals were 90% and 81% for split recipients and 99% and 96% for whole recipients, respectively (P = 0.34). The 5- and 10-year graft survivals were also comparable: 87% and 77% for split recipients, and 86% and 82% for whole recipients (P = 0.86). Cox regression analysis identified donor age >50, donor-to-recipient weight ratio < 1, retransplantation status, and United Network for Organ Sharing I-IIA status as risk factors for partial graft use. There were no significant differences in 5-year outcomes based on center volume. In conclusion, we demonstrate that adult liver transplantation with ERGs can achieve longterm success comparable with that of whole grafts in appropriate patients but should be selectively used in patients with risk factors. Liver Transplantation 23 1384-1395 2017 AASLD.

Is Elective Status a Predictor of Poor Survival in Liver Retransplantation?

BACKGROUND

Orthotopic liver retransplantation (reLT) is considered to have poorer outcomes than primary transplantation. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of medical urgency status as a predictor of patient survival after reLT.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients who underwent reLT were included in this retrospective study. Urgent or elective status was based on the judgment of the surgical team, selected variables, and the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify variables associated with patient survival following reLT.

RESULTS

Overall survival of the patient cohort was 57% at 1 year and 54.3% at 3 years after reTL. Survival in urgent-status patients was 68.8% and 63.4% at 1 and 3 years, respectively, whereas the survival rate for elective patients was 40.0% at both time points. Mortality was significantly associated with elective status (hazard ratio [HR], 2.42; P = .046) at 1 year, but was no longer significant (HR, 2.19; P < .069) after 3 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective status is associated with poorer outcome. Patient selection determines long-term survival more than any other single factor, so for patients designated to an elective status, prompt retransplantation should be encouraged.

Primary liver transplantation and liver retransplantation: comparison of health-related quality of life and mental status - a cross-sectional study

Background

Liver Retransplantation (Re-LT) procedures are associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Up to date, there is no knowledge on the health-related quality of life and the mental status of these patients.

Methods

Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) was assessed by using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey and Mental Status was assessed by using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The patients were examined in different assessments: During regular check-up examinations in the LT outpatient department in 2011 (Survey 1) and in a postal survey in 2013 (Survey 2). Their medical data was collected by using an established database.

Results

We received eligible surveys of 383 patients (55.6%) with a history of LT, of which 15 (3.9%) had undergone Re-LT (Re-LT group). These patients were compared to a group of 60 patients who had undergone only one LT. With regard to their HRQoL, the Re-LT group had significantly lower scores on the scales of physical function (PF, p = 0.026), their role-physical (RP, p = 0.008), their vitality (VIT, p = 0.040), and their role-emotional (RE, p = 0.005). The scores for anxiety and depression did not differ significantly between the groups. In a multiple regression analysis, chronic kidney disease was found to be an independent risk factor for decreased scores of PF (p = 0.023).

Conclusions

Patients who have to undergo Re-LT procedures are faceing impairments in physical aspects of a HRQoL. Together with clinical results from other studies, the findings of the present examination underline the need for an optimized organ distribution strategy since not all patients listed for Re-LT appear to benefit from it.

Prognostic Factors and Outcomes of Patients After Liver Retransplantation

BACKGROUND

Despite great progress and improvement in results of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx), 10%-20% of patients still require retransplantation (re-OLTx). The aim of the study was to present long-term results of liver retransplantation and to determine the factors influencing outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From December 1994 to July 2014, a total of 1461 liver transplantations were performed in the Department of General, Transplant and Liver Surgery of Medical University of Warsaw. There were 92 retransplantations (6.3%), including 40 early re-OLTx (up to 30 days). The most common indication for re-OLTx were vascular complications (41/92, 44.6%). Influence of clinical variables on short- and long-term outcomes was analyzed.

RESULTS

Postoperative mortality was 30.4% (28/92). One-year, 3-year and 5-year survival for all patients was 59.8%, 56.5% and 54.1%, respectively. The best results were achieved in patients undergoing retransplantation due to chronic rejection and biliary complications, whose 5-year survival rates were 75.0% and 72.9% respectively. There was no difference in long-term survival after early and late retransplantations (60.9% and 49.3%, respectively; P = .158). Multivariable analysis revealed factors associated with longer survival of patients, namely, higher preoperative hemoglobin concentration (P = .001), increased blood transfusions (P = .048), and decreased fresh frozen plasma transfusions (P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver retransplantation is a method providing satisfactory outcomes in selected patients. The perioperative period has a major impact on patient outcome.

When Living Donor Liver Allografts Fail: Exploring the Outcomes of Retransplantation Using Deceased Donors

Outcomes of retransplantation after initial living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are poorly understood. The aim of this study is to better understand the indications, timing, and outcomes of retransplantation after initial LDLT when compared to after initial deceased donor transplantation (DDLT). From 2002 to 2013, 209 retransplant recipients after initial LDLT and 2893 after initial DDLT were identified in Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing. Multivariable logistic models evaluated the association between initial transplant type and 1-year mortality. The most frequent reason for early graft failure (≤14 days) in LDLT recipients was vascular thrombosis (63.6%) versus primary graft failure in initial DDLT recipients (59.1%). LDLT recipients were more often acutely and/or critically ill with a greater proportion of Status 1 (42.6% vs. 27.3%; p < 0.001) and intensive care unit (52.2% vs. 39.9%; p = 0.001) recipients at the time of retransplantation. There was no difference in adjusted 1-year mortality between retransplant recipients after initial LDLT versus DDLT (odds ratio 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.51-1.08). The proportion of recipients who ultimately required retransplantation for a third time was not different between the two groups (4.8%). Retransplantation outcomes after LDLT are not different from other retransplant procedures, despite recipients having greater acuity of illness and different indications.

Cardiac Tamponade due to Suprahepatic Surgical Exploration in Liver Retransplantation: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Cardiac tamponade is an emergency condition that requires early recognition and prompt pericardial decompression. Little has been reported on cardiac tamponade in liver retransplantation (reLT), but most cases are fatal. We managed a case of reLT complicated by accidental cardiac tamponade.

CASE REPORT

A 59-year-old man underwent an emergency reLT because of liver cirrhosis with recurrent hepatitis B. During the dissection, suprahepatic exploration was attempted, but this resulted in severe hemorrhage because of the many tissue adhesions. After 1 hour of allograft reperfusion, the cardiac index and blood pressure dropped markedly despite volume resuscitation, and the central venous pressure increased abruptly. Using transthoracic echocardiography, cardiac tamponade was diagnosed, and an urgent pericardiotomy was performed. Although bizarre changes in the electrocardiogram were observed briefly, the vital signs normalized. After a short period of hypotension and hyperlactatemia in the intensive care unit, the patient was transferred to a ward in satisfactory condition on postoperative day 7.

CONCLUSION

This case demonstrates the need for careful monitoring of hemodynamics during suprahepatic exploration with marked tissue adhesions in reLT.

Host factors are dominant in the development of post-liver transplant non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a recognized problem in patients after orthotopic liver transplantation and may lead to recurrent graft injury. As the increased demand for liver allografts fail to match the available supply of donor organs, split liver transplantation (SLT) has emerged as an important technique to increase the supply of liver grafts. SLT allows two transplants to occur from one donor organ, and provides a unique model for observing the pathogenesis of NAFLD with respect to the role of recipient environmental and genetic factors. Here we report on two recipients of a SLT from the same deceased donor where only one developed non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), suggesting that host factors are critical for the development of NASH.

Liver Retransplantation in Patients With HIV-1 Infection: An International Multicenter Cohort Study

Liver retransplantation is performed in HIV-infected patients, although its outcome is not well known. In an international cohort study (eight countries), 37 (6%; 32 coinfected with hepatitis C virus [HCV] and five with hepatitis B virus [HBV]) of 600 HIV-infected patients who had undergone liver transplant were retransplanted. The main indications for retransplantation were vascular complications (35%), primary graft nonfunction (22%), rejection (19%), and HCV recurrence (13%). Overall, 19 patients (51%) died after retransplantation. Survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 56%, 51%, and 51%, respectively. Among patients with HCV coinfection, HCV RNA replication status at retransplantation was the only significant prognostic factor. Patients with undetectable versus detectable HCV RNA had a survival probability of 80% versus 39% at 1 year and 80% versus 30% at 3 and 5 years (p = 0.025). Recurrence of hepatitis C was the main cause of death in the latter. Patients with HBV coinfection had survival of 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years after retransplantation. HIV infection was adequately controlled with antiretroviral therapy. In conclusion, liver retransplantation is an acceptable option for HIV-infected patients with HBV or HCV coinfection but undetectable HCV RNA. Retransplantation in patients with HCV replication should be reassessed prospectively in the era of new direct antiviral agents.

Liver retransplantation in patients with acquired familial amyloid polyneuropathy: a Portuguese center experience

In 1995 Furtado et al performed the first domino transplantation using a donor liver with familial amyloid polyneuropathy (FAP), thereby increasing the pool of donors. Our experience showed that the onset of FAP symptoms occurs earlier in some patients. Patients with FAP acquired by transplantation are candidates for liver retransplantation to minimize the progression of symptoms. Liver retransplantation is considered to be a high-risk procedure and has lower survival compared with the first transplantation. We evaluated the risk of liver retransplantation in patients with acquired FAP. We did a retrospective analysis of these patients based on the records of perioperative data. From 1995 to 2004 we carried out 81 domino transplantations, of which 10 were submitted to liver retransplantation because of acquired FAP. The better outcomes in this group lead us to think that the liver retransplantation in patients with acquired FAP is not associated with the same risks of liver retransplantation in candidates with graft failure.

Optimizing repeat liver transplant graft utility through strategic matching of donor and recipient characteristics

Repeat liver transplantation (LT) is controversial because of inferior outcomes versus primary LT. A minimum 1-year expected post-re-LT survival of 50% has been proposed. We aimed to identify combinations of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), donor risk index (DRI), and recipient characteristics achieving this graft survival threshold. We identified re-LT recipients listed in the United States from March 2002 to January 2010 with > 90 days between primary LT and listing for re-LT. Using Cox regression, we estimated the expected probability of 1-year graft survival and identified combinations of MELD, DRI, and recipient characteristics attaining >50% expected 1-year graft survival. Re-LT recipients (n = 1418) had a median MELD of 26 and median age of 52 years. Expected 1-year graft survival exceeded 50% regardless of MELD or DRI in Caucasian recipients who were not infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) of all ages and Caucasian HCV-infected recipients <50 years old. As age increased in HCV-infected Caucasian and non-HCV-infected African American recipients, lower MELD scores or lower DRI grafts were needed to attain the graft survival threshold. As MELD scores increased in HCV-infected African American recipients, lower-DRI livers were required to achieve the graft survival threshold. Use of high-DRI livers (>1.44) in HCV-infected recipients with a MELD score > 26 at re-LT failed to achieve the graft survival threshold with recipient age ≥ 60 years (any race), as well as at age ≥ 50 years for Caucasians and at age < 50 years for African Americans. Strategic donor selection can achieve >50% expected 1-year graft survival even in high-risk re-LT recipients (HCV infected, older age, African American race, high MELD scores). Low-risk transplant recipients (age < 50 years, non-HCV-infected) can achieve the survival threshold with varying DRI and MELD scores.

Evaluation of operative risk in de novo familial amyloid polyneuropathy retransplantation

Familial amyloid polyneuropathy (FAP) is the most common hereditary amyloidosis, characterized by progressive peripheral sensory and motor neuropathy. The livers of patients with FAP are used in domino liver transplantation in selected cases to increase the number of grafts available. In our department 10 patients underwent liver retransplantation (ReLTx) in the absence of liver dysfunction by de novo FAP after domino liver transplantation. Our aim was to compare the differences in the consumption of blood products and intraoperative hemodynamic support among patients with FAP undergoing liver transplantation (LTx) and patients with de novo FAP undergoing ReLTx in the same time frame. The anesthetic records of all patients who underwent LTx for FAP and ReLTx for de novo FAP were analyzed, from January 2009 to May 2014. Patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 patients with FAP, and group 2 patients with de novo FAP. Statistical differences in the value of preoperative creatinine were found. Hemoglobin levels, preoperative international normalized ratio (INR), use of blood products, aminergic support, and surgical time showed no statistical difference. Major bleeding rates would be expected in patients undergoing ReLTx. Changes in renal function, chronic immunosuppressive therapy, and age may contribute to the increase in intraoperative complications. We did not find statistically significant differences, leading us to the conclusion that de novo FAP does not seem to be a predictor of perioperative risk.

Sofosbuvir and ribavirin before liver re-transplantation for graft failure due to recurrent hepatitis C: a case report

Background

Recurrent hepatitis C virus infection after liver transplantation is associated with reduced graft and patient survival. Re-transplantation for graft failure due to recurrent hepatitis C is controversial and not performed in all centers.

Case presentation

We describe a 54-year-old patient with hepatitis C virus genotype 1b infection and a null response to pegylated interferon-α and ribavirin who developed decompensated graft cirrhosis 6 years after a first liver transplantation. Treatment with sofosbuvir and ribavirin allowed for rapid negativation of serum HCV RNA and was well tolerated despite advanced liver and moderate renal dysfunction. Therapeutic drug monitoring did not reveal any clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Despite virological response, the patient remained severely decompensated and re-transplantation was performed after 46 days of undetectable serum HCV RNA. The patient is doing well 12 months after his second liver transplantation and remains free of hepatitis C virus.

Conclusions

The use of directly acting antivirals may allow for successful liver re-transplantation for recipients who remain decompensated despite virological response and is likely to improve the outcome of liver re-transplantation for end-stage recurrent hepatitis C.

Survival benefit of repeat liver transplantation in the United States: a serial MELD analysis by hepatitis C status and donor risk index

Survival benefit (SB) for first liver transplantation (LT) is favorable at Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)≥15. Herein, we identify the MELD threshold for SB from repeat liver transplantation (ReLT) by recipient hepatitis C virus (HCV) status and donor risk index (DRI). We analyzed lab MELD scores in new United Network for Organ Sharing registrants for ReLT from March 2002 to January 2010. Risk of ReLT graft failure≤1 year versus waitlist mortality was calculated using Cox regression, adjusting for recipient characteristics. Of 3057 ReLT candidates, 54% had HCV and 606 died while listed. There were 1985 ReLT recipients, 52% had HCV and 567 ReLT graft failures by 1 year. Unadjusted waitlist mortality and post-ReLT graft failure rates were 416 (95% confidence interval [CI] 384-450) and 375 (95% CI 345-407) per 1000 patient-years, respectively. Waitlist mortality was higher with increasing waitlist MELD (p<0.001). The MELD for SB from ReLT overall was 21 (21 in non-HCV and 24 in HCV patients). MELD for SB varied by DRI in HCV patients (MELD 21, 24 and 27 for low, medium and high DRI, respectively) but did not vary for non-HCV patients. Compared to first LT, ReLT requires a higher MELD threshold to achieve an SB resulting in a narrower therapeutic window to optimize the utility of scarce liver grafts.

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.