More Severe Deficits in Performance Status at Time of Liver Transplant is Associated With Significantly Higher Risk of Death Following Liver Transplantation

Frailty in liver transplantation: Exploring prescribing exercise as medicine to improve patient outcomes

Liver transplantation (LT) represents a curative avenue for individuals with advanced chronic liver disease. Given the inherent illness severity of LT candidates, identifying patients at greater risk for adverse outcomes before and after transplantation is paramount. Approximately 50% of cirrhotic patients are frail and have considerable functional impairment. Various measures have been used to assess frailty, including performance-based tests and functional status evaluations. Frailty carries significant prognostic implications and predicts both mortality and pre- and post-LT complications. Contributing factors to frailty in this population include sarcopenia, malnutrition, inflammation, and psychosocial factors. Recognizing the prevalence of frailty among LT candidates, exercise interventions have been developed to improve physical frailty and offer potential to improve patient outcomes. While many interventions have demonstrated efficacy without notable adverse events, the absence of a universally accepted standard for exercise prescription underscores the variability in intervention elements and patient adherence. Given the safety profile of exercise interventions, there remains a critical need for standardized protocols and guidelines to optimize exercise regimens for LT candidates. This review delves into the landscape of frailty among LT candidates, elucidating its etiological underpinnings, impact on outcomes, utilization of exercise interventions, and the efficacy of exercise programs in reducing the burden frailty in those awaiting LT.

Inpatient Frailty Assessment Is Feasible and Predicts Nonhome Discharge and Mortality in Decompensated Cirrhosis

Objective inpatient frailty assessments in decompensated cirrhosis are understudied. We examined the feasibility of inpatient frailty measurements and associations with nonhome discharge, readmission, and all-cause mortality among patients admitted for cirrhosis complications. We conducted a prospective study at 3 liver transplantation (LT) centers. Frailty was assessed using the liver frailty index (LFI). Multivariable logistic and competing risk models evaluated associations between frailty and clinical outcomes. We included 211 patients with median MELD-Na score 21 (interquartile range [IQR],15-27); 96 (45%) were women, and 102 (48%) were on the LT waiting list. At a median follow-up of 8.3 months, 29 patients (14%) were nonhome discharged, 144 (68%) were readmitted, 70 (33%) underwent LT, and 44 (21%) died. A total of 124 patients (59%) were frail, with a median LFI of 4.71 (IQR, 4.07-5.54). Frail patients were older (mean, 59 versus 54 years) and more likely to have chronic kidney disease (40% versus 20%; P = 0.002) and coronary artery disease (17% versus 7%; P = 0.03). Frailty was associated with hospital-acquired infections (8% versus 1%; P = 0.02). In multivariable models, LFI was associated with nonhome discharge (odds ratio, 1.81 per 1-point increase; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.86). Frailty (LFI≥4.5) was associated with all-cause mortality in models accounting for LT as competing risk (subhazard ratio [sHR], 2.4; 95% CI, 1.13-5.11); results were similar with LFI as a continuous variable (sHR, 1.62 per 1-point increase; 95% CI, 1.15-2.28). A brief, objective inpatient frailty assessment was feasible and predicted nonhome discharge and mortality in decompensated cirrhosis. Inpatient point-of-care frailty assessment prior to hospital discharge can be useful for risk stratification and targeted interventions to improve physical fitness and reduce adverse outcomes.

Impact of pretransplant frailty and sarcopenia on the post-transplant prognosis of patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Frailty and sarcopenia associate with increased mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis on the transplant waitlist. We conducted a systematic review on the impact of pretransplant frailty and sarcopenia on post-transplant outcomes in adult patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a search in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central. Of the 12276 references initially recovered, 34 were included.

RESULTS

Frailty and sarcopenia presented a negative impact on post-transplant outcomes and seemed to associate with an overall two-fold reduction in early and 50% reduction in late survival, for severe conditions, according to the largest cohorts. These patients required longer ICU and hospitalization time, had higher rates of sepsis and respiratory complications and lower graft-survival. The reversibility of frailty depended on the severity of functional impairment and on the co-morbidities contributing to frailty. Reversibility of sarcopenia occurred in only a minority of patients, in unbiased studies.

CONCLUSION

Frailty and sarcopenia are double-edged swords: patients with frailty/sarcopenia should be prioritized for liver transplantation due to increased mortality on the waitlist; however, severe frailty/sarcopenia may justify delisting because it associates with dismal prognosis post-liver transplantation. Patients presenting mild to moderate frailty/sarcopenia, should be submitted to liver transplantation before those conditions worsen to a level that significantly impacts post-liver transplantation outcomes.

Prehabilitation-Driven Changes in Frailty Metrics Predict Mortality in Patients With Advanced Liver Disease

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is a predictor of morbidity and mortality in cirrhosis. Although evidence for prehabilitation is promising, the data for liver transplant (LT) candidates are limited. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a novel prehabilitation strategy on changes in frailty metrics and survival in LT candidates. The secondary aim was to determine liver-related and extrahepatic conditions associated with frailty.

METHODS

In this ambispective cohort study, all patients underwent frailty assessment using the liver frailty index (LFI), 6-minute walk test, and gait speed test performed by a dedicated physical therapist. Home-based exercise prescription was individualized to each patient's baseline physical fitness.

RESULTS

We included 517 patients (59% men, median age 61 years, and a model for end-stage liver disease score of 12) evaluated during 936 PT visits. Frailty metrics were affected by age, sex, and liver-related parameters, but not by model for end-stage liver disease. Patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and alcohol-related cirrhosis had worse frailty metrics by all tools. We demonstrated the feasibility of prehabilitation in improving both LFI and 6-minute walk test, particularly in adherent patients. A median LFI improvement of 0.3 in frail patients was associated with improved survival in univariate analysis. Compliance with physical therapist visits (hazards ratio = 0.35 [0.18-0.67] for 2 visits and hazards ratio = 0.54 [0.31-0.94] for ≥3 visits) was independently associated with increased survival.

DISCUSSION

Prehabilitation improves frailty metrics in LT candidates and is associated with a survival advantage. Our findings provide a framework for the standardized prehabilitation program in LT candidates while prioritizing compliance, adherence, and on-training LFI goal accomplishment.

Physiologic Reserve Assessment and Application in Clinical and Research Settings in Liver Transplantation

Physiologic reserve is an important prognostic indicator. Because of its complexity, no single test can measure an individual's physiologic reserve. Frailty is the phenotypic expression of decreased reserve and portends poor prognosis. Both subjective and objective tools have been used to measure one or more components of physiologic reserve. Most of these tools appear to predict pretransplant mortality, but only some predict posttransplant survival. Incorporation of these measures of physiologic reserve in the clinical and research settings including prediction models are reviewed, and the applicability to patient-related outcomes are discussed. Commonly used tools, in patients with cirrhosis, that have been associated with clinical outcomes were reviewed. The strength of subjective tools lies in low-cost, wide availability, and quick assessments at the bedside. A disadvantage of these tools is the manipulative capacity, restricting their value in allocation processes. The strength of objective tests lies in objective measurements and the ability to measure change. The disadvantages include complexity, increased cost, and limited accessibility. Heterogeneity in the definitions and tools used has prevented further advancement or a clear role in transplant assessment. Consistent use of objective tools, including the 6-minute walk test, gait speed, Liver Frailty Index, or Short Physical Performance Battery, are recommended in clinical and research settings.

Introducing EL-FIT (Exercise and Liver FITness): A Smartphone App to Prehabilitate and Monitor Liver Transplant Candidates

Preserved physical function is key for successful liver transplantation (LT); however, prehabilitation strategies are underdeveloped. We created a smartphone application (app), EL-FIT (Exercise and Liver FITness), to facilitate exercise training in end-stage liver disease (ESLD). In this feasibility study, we tested EL-FIT app usage and the accuracy of physical activity data transfer and obtained feedback from initial users. A total of 28 participants used the EL-FIT app and wore a physical activity tracker for 38 ± 12 days (age, 60 ± 8 years; 57% males; Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-sodium, 19 ± 5). There was fidelity in data transfer from the tracker to the EL-FIT app. Participants were sedentary (1957 [interquartile range, 873-4643] steps/day) at baseline. Level of training assigned by the EL-FIT app agreed with that from a physical therapist in 89% of cases. Participants interacted with all app features (videos, perceived exertion, and gamification/motivational features). We rearranged training data to generate heart rate-validated steps as a marker of performance and showed that 35% of the participants had significant increases in their physical performance. Participants emphasized their interest in having choices to better engage in exercise, and they appreciated the sense of community the EL-FIT app generated. We showed that patients with ESLD are able to use and interact with the EL-FIT app. This novel smartphone app has the potential of becoming an invaluable tool for home-based prehabilitation in LT candidates.

Patients with Alcoholic Liver Disease Have Worse Functional Status at Time of Liver Transplant Registration and Greater Waitlist and Post-transplant Mortality Which Is Compounded by Older Age

BACKGROUND

Worse functional status correlates with increased mortality on the liver transplant (LT) waitlist. Whether functional status affects LT outcomes equally across cirrhosis etiologies is unclear.

AIMS

We evaluate the impact of functional status on waitlist and post-LT mortality stratified by etiology and age.

METHODS

Functional status among US adults from 2005 to 2017 United Network for Organ Sharing LT registry data was retrospectively evaluated using Karnofsky Performance Status Score (KPS-1 = functional status 80-100%, KPS-2 = 60-70%, KPS-3 = 40-50%, KPS-4 = 10-30%). Waitlist and post-LT survival were stratified by KPS and cirrhosis etiology, including alcoholic liver disease (ALD), nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), hepatitis C (HCV), and HCV/ALD, and evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Among 94,201 waitlist registrants (69.4% men, 39.5% HCV, 26.7% ALD, 23.2% NASH), ALD patients had worse functional status compared to HCV (KPS-4: 17.2% vs. 8.3%, p < 0.001). Worse functional status at time of waitlist registration was associated with higher 90-day waitlist mortality with the greatest effect in ALD (KPS-4 vs. KPS-1: ALD HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.83-2.55; HCV HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.87-2.51). Similar trends occurred in 5-year post-LT survival with ALD patients the most harmed. Compared to patients < 50 years, patients ≥ 65 years had increased waitlist mortality at 90-days if they had HCV or HCV/ALD, and 5-year post-LT mortality regardless of cirrhosis etiology with ALD patients most severely affected.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective cohort study of patients, US ALD patients had disparately worse functional status at time of LT waitlist registration. Worse functional status correlated with higher risk of waitlist and post-LT mortality, affecting ALD and HCV patients the most.

Functional Status at Liver Transplant Waitlisting Correlates With Greater Odds of Encephalopathy, Ascites, and Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Whether higher liver transplant (LT) waitlist mortality in patients with poor functional status (FS) is mediated by higher prevalence of cirrhosis complications is not clear. We aim to evaluate the impact of FS on risk of hepatic encephalopathy (HE), ascites, and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) among adults listed for LT.

METHODS

Using 2005-2018 United Network for Organ Sharing LT data, we retrospectively evaluated the impact of FS on prevalence of ascites, HE, and SBP among adults listed for LT using Karnofsky Performance Status Score categories (KPSS-1: FS 80-100%, KPSS-2: 60-70%, KPSS-3: 40-50%, KPSS-4: 10-30%), stratified by underlying liver disease etiology. Between-group comparisons used chi-squared methods and adjusted multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 100,618 adults listed for LT (68.8% male, 72.4% non-Hispanic white) 35.2% were KPSS-1, 36.6% KPSS-2, 15.7% KPSS-3, and 12.6% KPSS-4 at time of LT waitlist registration. Patients with worse FS were significantly more likely to have ascites, HE, and SBP at time of waitlist registration (KPSS-1 vs. KPSS-4: ascites, 66% vs. 93%; HE, 81% vs. 49%; SBP, 4% vs. 16%, p < 0.001 for all). On multivariate regression, compared with patients with KPSS-1, those with KPSS-4 had significantly higher odds of ascites (odds ratio [OR]: 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.37-1.62, p < 0.01), HE (OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.59-1.80, p < 0.01), and SBP (OR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.98-2.38, p < 0.01), which was observed across all liver disease etiologies.

CONCLUSION

Worse FS is associated with higher odds of cirrhosis complications including ascites, HE, and SBP, which was observed across all liver disease etiologies.