Use of Elderly Allografts in Liver Transplantation

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocarcinoma: Results over Two Decades of a Transplantation Programme and Analysis of Factors Associated with Recurrence

BACKGROUND

In recent years, many studies have attempted to develop models to predict the recurrence of hepatocarcinoma after liver transplantation.

METHOD

A single-centre, retrospective cohort study analysed patients receiving transplants due to hepatocarcinoma during the 20 years of the transplant programme. We analysed patient survival, hepatocarcinoma recurrence and the influence of the different factors described in the literature as related to hepatocarcinoma recurrence. We compared the results of previous items between the first and second decades of the transplantation programme (1995-2010 and 2010-2020).

RESULTS

Of 265 patients, the patient survival rate was 68% at 5 years, 58% at 10 years, 45% at 15 years and 34% at 20 years. The overall recurrence rate of hepatocarcinoma was 14.5%, without differences between periods. Of these, 54% of recurrences occurred early, in the first two years after transplantation. Of the parameters analysed, an alpha-fetoprotein level of >16 ng/mL, the type of immunosuppression used and the characteristics of the pathological anatomy of the explant were significant. A trend towards statistical significance was identified for the number of nodules and the size of the largest nodule. Logistic regression analysis was used to develop a model with a sensitivity of 85.7% and a specificity of 35.7% to predict recurrences in our cohort. Regarding the comparison between periods, the survival and recurrence rates of hepatocarcinoma were similar. The impact of the factors analysed in both decades was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Most recurrences occur during the first two years post-transplantation, so closer follow-ups should be performed during this period, especially in those patients where the model predicts a high risk of recurrence. The detection of patients at higher risk of recurrence allows for closer follow-up and may, in the future, make them candidates for adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic therapies to transplantation.

Post-transplant biliary complications using liver grafts from deceased donors older than 70 years: Retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

The shortage of liver grafts and subsequent waitlist mortality led us to expand the donor pool using liver grafts from older donors.

AIM

To determine the incidence, outcomes, and risk factors for biliary complications (BC) in liver transplantation (LT) using liver grafts from donors aged > 70 years.

METHODS

Between January 1994 and December 31, 2019, 297 LTs were performed using donors older than 70 years. After excluding 47 LT for several reasons, we divided 250 LTs into two groups, namely post-LT BC (n = 21) and without BC (n = 229). This retrospective case-control study compared both groups.

RESULTS

Choledocho-choledochostomy without T-tube was the most frequent technique (76.2% in the BC group vs 92.6% in the non-BC group). Twenty-one patients (8.4%) developed BC (13 anastomotic strictures, 7 biliary leakages, and 1 non-anastomotic biliary stricture). Nine patients underwent percutaneous balloon dilation and nine required a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy because of dilation failure. The incidence of post-LT complications (graft dysfunction, rejection, renal failure, and non-BC reoperations) was similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in the patient and graft survival between the groups. Moreover, only three deaths were attributed to BC. While female donors were protective factors for BC, donor cardiac arrest was a risk factor.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of BC was relatively low on using liver grafts > 70 years. It could be managed in most cases by percutaneous dilation or Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, without significant differences in the patient or graft survival between the groups.

Expanding Liver Transplant Opportunities in Older Patients With Nonconventional Grafts

INTRODUCTION

Broader use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and nonconventional grafts for liver transplant helps reduce disparities in organ availability. Limited data, however, exists on outcomes specific to nonconventional graft utilization in older patients. As such, this study aimed to investigate outcomes specific to conventional and nonconventional graft utilization in recipients > 70 y of age.

METHODS

1-to-3 matching based on recipient sex, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and donor type was performed on patients ≥70 and <70 y of age who underwent liver transplant alone at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2015 and 2020. Primary outcomes were posttransplant patient and liver allograft survival for recipients greater than or less than 70 y of age. Secondary outcomes included grafts utilization patterns, hospital length of stay, need for reoperation, biliary complications and disposition at time of hospital discharge.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 36.1% of grafts came from DCD donors, 17.4% were postcross clamp offers, and 20.8% were nationally allocated. Median recipient ages were 59 and 71 y (P < 0.01). Recipients had similar Intensive care unit (P = 0.82) and hospital (P = 0.14) lengths of stay, and there were no differences in patient (P = 0.68) or graft (P = 0.38) survival. When comparing donation after brain death and DCD grafts in those >70 y, there were no differences in patient (P = 0.89) or graft (P = 0.71) survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Excellent outcomes can be achieved in older recipients, even with use of nonconventional grafts. Expanded use of nonconventional grafts can help facilitate transplant opportunities in older patients.

Liver Transplant Recipient Characteristics Associated With Worse Post-Transplant Outcomes in Using Elderly Donors

Advanced age of liver donor is a risk factor for graft loss after transplant. We sought to identify recipient characteristics associated with negative post-liver transplant (LT) outcomes in the context of elderly donors. Using 2014–2019 OPTN/UNOS data, LT recipients were classified by donor age: ≥70, 40–69, and <40 years. Recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were identified and created a risk stratification system and validated it using 2020 OPTN/UNOS data set. At transplant, significant recipient risk factors for one-year graft loss were: previous liver transplant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.37, 95%CI 1.98–9.65); mechanical ventilation (aHR 4.28, 95%CI 1.95–9.43); portal thrombus (aHR 1.87, 95%CI 1.26–2.77); serum sodium <125 mEq/L (aHR 2.88, 95%CI 1.34–6.20); and Karnofsky score 10–30% (aHR 2.03, 95%CI 1.13–3.65), 40–60% (aHR 1.65, 95%CI 1.08–2.51). Using those risk factors and multiplying HRs, recipients were divided into low-risk (n = 931) and high-risk (n = 294). Adjusted risk of one-year graft loss in the low-risk recipient group was similar to that of patients with younger donors; results were consistent using validation dataset. Our results show that a system of careful recipient selection can reduce the risks of graft loss associated with older donor age.

Safe use of livers from deceased donors older than 70 years in recipients with HCV cirrhosis treated with direct-action antivirals. Retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There is controversy regarding the use of older grafts for liver transplantation (LT) in HCV-infected patients, but the introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) can radically change that debate.

METHODS

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate outcomes of the use of liver grafts from donors older than 70 years in recipients with HCV infection who underwent pre- or post-LT treatment with DAA. We compared two groups of patients who underwent LT using livers >70 years; the groups were defined according to antiviral therapy: non-DAA therapy group (n = 62; LT between May 1996 and December 2013), and DAA therapy group (n = 31; LT between January 2014 and December 2019).

RESULTS

Thirty (96.8%) patients of DAA therapy and nine (14.5%) of non-DAA therapy (21 patients underwent complete therapy with interferon-ribavirin) achieved sustained viral response (SVR). One, 3-, and 5-year patient survival were 83.9%, 67.7%, and 56.5% in the non-DAA group vs 93.5%, 88.4%, and 88.4% in the DAA group (P = 0.04); the 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival were 77.4%, 62.9%, and 51.6% in the non-DAA group vs. 88.6%, 83.7%, and 83.7% in the DAA group (P = 0.03). Multivariate analysis demonstrated donor female sex and DAA therapy as protective factors of graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre- or post-LT therapy with DAA in HCV-infected patients has achieved an almost overall SVR. The use of liver grafts >70 years in these patients treated with DAA was associated with significantly higher 5-year patient and graft survival in DAA group compared to non-DAA group. Thus, the introduction of DAA therapy has allowed the safe use of livers >70 years in HCV-positive recipients.

Differential Influence of Donor Age Depending on the Indication for Liver Transplantation-A Collaborative Transplant Study Report

BACKGROUND

Despite steadily increasing donor age, there are no general guidelines for the use of organs from elderly donors in liver transplantation. This study focuses on identifying the recipients who are less affected from an old-donor organ graft and conversely in whom a rather unfavorable outcome is expected because of high donor age.

METHODS

Forty-eight thousand two hundred sixty-one adult liver transplantations, performed between 2000 and 2017 and reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The proportion of ≥65-year-old donors has risen to >33% in recent years. The donor age has an approximately linear influence on graft survival. On average, each year's rise in the donor age was associated with a 0.9% increase in the risk of graft loss (hazard ratio [HR], 1.009; P < 0.001). The impact of donor age was strong in patients with hepatitis C-related cirrhosis (HR, 1.013; P < 0.001), substantial in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis (HR, 1.007; P < 0.001) and rather weak in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 1.003; P = 0.038). The increase in the risk of graft loss per year rise in donor age was 1.4% for 18 to 49 year olds, 1.0% for middle-aged, and only 0.4% for ≥60-year-old recipients (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Consequently, older recipients and especially patients with hepatocellular carcinoma seem to be less affected by an increased donor age, whereas the donor age is an important factor in all other patient groups.

The Differential Influence of Cold Ischemia Time on Outcome After Liver Transplantation for Different Indications-Who Is at Risk? A Collaborative Transplant Study Report

Introduction: Despite increasing awareness of the negative impact of cold ischemia time (CIT) in liver transplantation, its precise influence in different subgroups of liver transplant recipients has not been analyzed in detail. This study aimed to identify liver transplant recipients with an unfavorable outcome due to prolonged cold ischemia. Methods: 40,288 adult liver transplantations, performed between 1998 and 2017 and reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study were analyzed. Results: Prolonged CIT significantly reduced graft and patient survival only during the first post-transplant year. On average, each hour added to the cold ischemia was associated with a 3.4% increase in the risk of graft loss (hazard ratio (HR) 1.034, P < 0.001). The impact of CIT was strongest in patients with hepatitis C-related (HCV) cirrhosis with a 24% higher risk of graft loss already at 8-9 h (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47, P = 0.011) and 64% higher risk at ≥14 h (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.30-2.09, P < 0.001). In contrast, patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and alcoholic cirrhosis tolerated longer ischemia times up to <10 and <12 h, respectively, without significant impact on graft survival (P = 0.47 and 0.42). In HCC patients with model of end-stage liver disease scores (MELD) <20, graft survival was not significantly impaired in the cases of CIT up to 13 h. Conclusion: The negative influence of CIT on liver transplant outcome depends on the underlying disease, patients with HCV-related cirrhosis being at the highest risk of graft loss due to prolonged cold ischemia. Grafts with longer cold preservation times should preferentially be allocated to recipients with alcoholic cirrhosis and HCC patients with MELD <20, in whom the effect of cold ischemia is less pronounced.

Liver Grafts with Major Extended Donor Criteria May Expand the Organ Pool for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The major extended donor criteria (maEDC; steatosis >40%, age >65 years, and cold ischemia time >14 h) influence graft and patient outcomes after liver transplantation. Despite organ shortages, maEDC organs are often considered unsuitable for transplantation. We investigated the outcomes of maEDC organ liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Two hundred and sixty-four HCC liver transplant patients were eligible for analysis. Risk factor analysis was performed for early allograft dysfunction; primary nonfunction; 30-day and 90-day graft failure; and 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year patient mortality. One-year graft survival was higher in recipients of no-maEDC grafts. One-year patient survival did not differ between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs. The univariate and multivariate analyses revealed no association between maEDC grafts and one-year patient mortality. Graft survival differed between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs after correcting for a laboratory model of end-stage liver disease (labMELD) score with a cut-off value of 20, but patient survival did not. Patient survival did not differ between recipients who did and did not meet the Milan criteria and who received grafts with and without maEDC. Instead of being discarded, maEDC grafts may expand the organ pool for patients with HCC without impairing patient survival or recurrence-free survival.

Grafts from selected deceased donors over 80 years old can safely expand the number of liver transplants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present the outcome of deceased adult liver transplantation from octogenarian (≥80 years old) donors compared to younger grafts.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on six databases to identify all available original papers that report the outcome of adult recipients who underwent liver transplantation from a deceased octogenarian donor.

RESULTS

Overall, 39,034 liver transplantations from 12 studies were reported with 789 (2.02%) cases receiving grafts from octogenarian donors. Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference regarding the one, three, and five-year graft and patient survival between the recipients of livers <80 years old and octogenarian grafts. There were significantly more episodes of biliary complications in the recipients of octogenarian grafts (34/459; 7.4%) in comparison to the recipients of livers <80 years old (372/37074; 1.0%) (OR 0.53; 95% CI = 0.35-0.81; P 0.004; I² = 0%). The incidence of primary non-function, vascular complications and re-transplantation did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and medium-term graft and patient survival of octogenarian liver transplantation is not inferior compared to the liver transplantation with younger grafts, however with a higher rate of biliary complications.

Assessment of Trends in Transplantation of Liver Grafts From Older Donors and Outcomes in Recipients of Liver Grafts From Older Donors, 2003-2016

Importance

In light of the growing population of older adults in the United States, older donors (aged ≥70 years) represent an expansion of the donor pool; however, their organs are underused. Liver grafts from older donors were historically associated with poor outcomes and higher discard rates, but clinical protocols, organ allocation, and the donor pool have changed in the past 15 years.

Objective

To evaluate trends in demographics, discard rates, and outcomes among older liver donors and transplant recipients of livers from older donors in a large national cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective cohort study of 4127 liver grafts from older donors and 3350 liver-only recipients of older donor grafts and 78 990 liver grafts from younger donors (aged 18-69 years) and 64 907 liver-only recipients of younger donor grafts between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2016, in the United States. The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, which includes data on all transplant recipients in the United States that are submitted by members of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, was used.

Exposures

Year of liver transplant and age of liver donor.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Odds of graft discard and posttransplant outcomes of all-cause graft loss and mortality.

Results

In this study, 4127 liver grafts from older donors were recovered for liver transplant across the study period (2003-2016); 747 liver grafts from older donors were discarded, and 3350 liver grafts from older donors were used for liver-only recipients. After adjusting for donor characteristics other than age and accounting for Organ Procurement Organization-level variation, liver grafts from older donors were more likely to be discarded compared with liver grafts from younger donors in 2003-2006 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.68-2.31), 2007-2009 (aOR, 2.55; 95% CI, 2.17-3.01), 2010-2013 (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.68-2.46), and 2013-2016 (aOR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.96-2.86) (P < .001 for all). Transplants of liver grafts from older donors represented a progressively lower proportion of all adult liver transplants, from 6.0% (n = 258 recipients) in 2003 to 3.2% (n = 211 recipients) in 2016 (P = .001). However, outcomes in recipients of grafts from older donors improved over time, with 40% lower graft loss risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.68; P < .001) and 41% lower mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.52-0.68; P < .001) in 2010 through 2016 vs 2003 through 2009; these results were beyond the general temporal improvements in graft loss (interaction P = .03) and mortality risk (interaction P = .04) among recipients of liver grafts from younger donors.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings show that from 2003 to 2016, liver graft loss and mortality among recipients of liver grafts from older donors improved; however, liver graft discard from older donors remained increased and the number of transplants performed with liver grafts from older donors decreased. Expansion of the donor pool through broader use of liver grafts from older donors might be reasonable.

Minimizing Risk Associated With Older Liver Donors by Matching to Preferred Recipients: A National Registry and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Allografts from older liver donors (OLDs), 70 years or older are often discarded for fear of inferior outcomes. We previously identified "preferred recipients" who did not suffer the higher risk of graft loss and mortality associated with OLDs. Preferred recipients were first-time, non-status 1 registrants older than 45 years, body mass index less than 35, indication other than hepatitis C, and cold ischemia time less than 8 hours.

METHODS

We assessed the validity of the preferred recipient construct in a larger, more recent cohort (38 891 patients, 2006-2013). We compared recipients of OLD grafts to recipients of average liver donors (ALDs, age = 40-69) and ideal liver donors (ILDs, age = 18-39) grafts using multilevel Cox regression adjusting for recipient and transplant factors.

RESULTS

The use of OLD grafts in preferred recipients has increased from 2006 to 2013 (P = 0.02). Preferred recipients Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores ranged 6 to 40. Preferred recipients had similar 5-year all-cause graft loss (ACGL) with OLD versus ALD and ILD grafts (25.4% vs 24.5% and 21.6%). Conversely, nonpreferred recipients had higher 5-year ACGL with OLD versus ALD and ILD grafts (41.4% vs 32.9% and 25.6%). After adjustment, preferred recipients had similar graft loss with OLD versus ALD grafts (hazard ratio [HR], 0.921.081.27; P = 0.3) and ILD grafts (HR, 0.981.161.39, P = 0.09); however, nonpreferred recipients had higher ACGL risk with OLD grafts versus ALD (HR, 1.281.411.56, P < 0.001) and ILD grafts (HR, 1.501.671.86, P < 0.001). Similar trends are seen with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Because preferred recipients comprise 43.3% (n = 2916) of the current waitlist and span the full range of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores, transplanted OLD allografts could be distributed without added risk of graft loss or mortality.

Age Matching of Elderly Liver Grafts With Elderly Recipients Does Not Have a Synergistic Effect on Long-term Outcomes When Both Are Carefully Selected

BACKGROUND

Older donors and recipients are increasingly considered for liver transplantation. Both donor and recipient age have a negative impact on outcomes. Large registry analyses show that older donors are frequently matched to older recipients. Whether age-related risks accumulate in a synergic negative effect on outcomes because of donor-recipient age matching is poorly understood.

METHODS

We investigated the impact of donor-recipient age interaction on patient and death-censored graft survival in multivariate Cox regressions in 849 transplants (January 2000 to December 2015).

RESULTS

Donors 70 years or older did not affect long-term patient or graft survival. Recipient age independently increased the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.05, P < 0.0001), but donor-recipient age interaction was noninfluential. The negative impact of recipient age on patient survival was significant as early as 6 months after transplantation (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; P = 0.00008). The adjusted risk of death was significant for patients aged 60 to 69 years (HR, 1.995; 95% CI, 1.40-2.85; P < 0.0001) and 70 years or older (HR, 2.001; 95% CI, 1.10-2.66; P = 0.04). In contrast, the risk of graft loss was not influenced by recipient age (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.996-1.04; P = 0.11) or age interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Older livers can be safely used in older recipients without jeopardizing graft and patient survival if other risk factors are minimized.

Recipient Selection for Optimal Utilization of Discarded Grafts in Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

In France, liver grafts that have been refused by at least 5 teams are considered for rescue allocation (RA), with the choice of the recipient being at the team's discretion. Although this system permits the use of otherwise discarded grafts in a context of organ shortage, outcomes and potential benefits need to be assessed.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2015, outcomes of RA grafts (n = 33) were compared with SA grafts (n = 321) at a single French center.

RESULTS

Liver grafts in the RA group were older (63 ± 17 years vs 54 ± 18 years, P = 0.007) and had a higher DRI (1.86 ± 0.45 vs 1.61 ± 0.47, P = 0.010). Recipients in this group had a lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (14 ± 5 vs 22 ± 10, P < 0.001) and had mostly hepatocellular carcinoma (67.0% vs 40.4%, P = 0.010). The balance of risk score was significantly lower in the RA group (5.5 ± 2.9 vs 9.2 ± 5.5, P < 0.001). There were higher rates of early and delayed hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2% vs 3.1%, P = 0.001) and retransplantation (18.2% vs 4.7%, P = 0.002) in the RA group. Patient survival was not different between groups, but graft survival was impaired (95% vs 82% at 1 year and 94% vs 74% at 3 years, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that discarded liver grafts can be used provided that there is a strict recipient selection process, although hepatic artery thrombosis and retransplantation are more frequent. This strategy enables utilization of otherwise discarded grafts in the context of organ shortage.

GABA, γ-Aminobutyric Acid, Protects Against Severe Liver Injury

BACKGROUND

Acute liver failure (ALF) from severe acute liver injury is a critical condition associated with high mortality. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of preemptive administration of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) on hepatic injury and survival outcomes in mice with experimentally induced ALF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To induce ALF, C57BL/6NHsd mice were administered GABA, saline, or nothing for 7 d, followed by intraperitoneal administration of 500 μg of tumor necrosis factor α and 20 mg of D-galactosamine. The study mice were humanely euthanized 4-5 h after ALF was induced or observed for survival. Proteins present in the blood samples and liver tissue from the euthanized mice were analyzed using Western blot and immunohistochemical and histopathologic analyses. For inhibition studies, we administered the STAT3-specific inhibitor, NSC74859, 90 min before ALF induction.

RESULTS

We found that GABA-treated mice had substantial attenuation of terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling-positive hepatocytes and hepatocellular necrosis, decreased caspase-3, H2AX, and p38 MAPK protein levels and increased expressions of Jak2, STAT3, Bcl-2, and Mn-SOD, with improved mitochondrial integrity. The reduced apoptotic proteins led to a significantly prolonged survival after ALF induction in GABA-treated mice. The STAT3-specific inhibitor NSC74859 eliminated the survival advantage in GABA-treated mice with ALF, indicating the involvement of the STAT3 pathway in GABA-induced reduction in apoptosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that preemptive treatment with GABA protected against severe acute liver injury in mice via GABA-mediated STAT3 signaling. Preemptive administration of GABA may be a useful approach to optimize marginal donor livers before transplantation.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of liver transplantation using grafts from deceased donors aged over 70 years

INTRODUCTION

Due to the current organ shortage, nearly 20% of patients die waiting for a liver transplant (LT). The average donor age is on the rise, and grafts from elderly donors are offered as extended criteria grafts.

METHODS

This is a meta-analysis comparing the outcome differences of adult patients undergoing LT using grafts from <70-year-old donors vs >70-year-old donors. The primary end-points were graft and patient survival. Secondary outcomes were biliary and vascular complications as well as graft function. The odds ratio (OR) is a summary statistic with the corresponding 95% confidence interval; P < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

Eight nonrandomized comparative studies with 4376 LT recipients were included. About 79.9% and 20.1% of the grafts were from <70-year-old and >70-year-old donors, respectively. Graft survival at 1 year was similar between the two groups (P = .11), but there was better 3-year and 5-year graft survival in the >70-year-old group (P = .006 and P < .0001, respectively). Patient survival was also similar between the groups at 1 year (P = .54), but with better survival at 3-year and 5-year follow-ups (P = .007 and P < .0001, respectively) in the >70-year-old group. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of biliary, vascular, and graft functional-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Liver grafts from selected >70-year-old donors do not pose added organ-specific risks and thus have comparable transplantation outcomes.

Actual Risk of Using Very Aged Donors for Unselected Liver Transplant Candidates: A European Single-center Experience in the MELD Era

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the whole experience of liver transplantation (LT) with donors ≥70 years in a single center not applying specific donor/recipient matching criteria.

BACKGROUND

LT with very old donors has historically been associated with poorer outcomes. With the increasing average donor age and the advent of Model for End-stage Liver Diseases (MELD) score-based allocation criteria, an optimal donor/recipient matching is often unsuitable.

METHODS

Outcomes of all types of LTs were compared according to 4 study groups: patients transplanted between 1998 and 2003 with donors <70 (group 1, n = 396) or ≥70 years (group 2, n = 88); patients transplanted between 2004 and 2010 with donors <70 (group 3, n = 409), or ≥70 years (group 4, n = 190). From 2003, graft histology was routinely available before cross-clamping, and MELD-driven allocation was adopted.

RESULTS

Groups 1 and 2 were similar for main donor and recipient variables, and surgical details. Group 4 had shorter donor ICU stay, lower rate of moderate-to-severe graft macrosteatosis (2.3% vs 8%), and higher recipient MELD score (22 vs 19) versus group 3. After 2003, median donor age, recipient age, and MELD score significantly increased, whereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased. Five-year graft survival was 63.6% in group 1 versus 59.1% in group 2 (P = 0.252) and 70.9% in group 3 versus 67.6% in group 4 (P = 0.129). Transplants performed between 1998 and 2003, recipient HCV infection, balance of risk score >18, and pre-LT renal replacement treatments were independently associated with worse graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Even without specific donor/recipient matching criteria, the outcomes of LT with donors ≥70 and <70 years are comparable with appropriate donor management.

Octogenarian donors in liver transplantation grant an equivalent perioperative course to ideal young donors

BACKGROUND

Use of grafts from very old donors for liver transplantation is controversial.

AIM

To compare the perioperative course of patients receiving liver grafts from young ideal vs octogenarian donors.

METHODS

Analysis of the perioperative course of patients receiving liver grafts from young, ideal (18-39 years) vs octogenarian (≥80years) deceased donors between 2001 and 2014.

RESULTS

346 patients were studied: 179 (51.7%) received grafts aged 18-39 years whereas 167 (48.3%) received a graft from a donor aged ≥80years. Intra-operative cardiovascular (p=0.2), coagulopathy (p=0.5) and respiratory (p=1.0) complications and incidence of reperfusion syndrome (p=0.3) were similar. Patients receiving a young graft required more fresh frozen plasma units (p≤0.03) but did not differ for the need of packed red cells (p=0.2) and platelet (p=0.3) transfusions. Median ICU stay was identical (p=0.4). Patients receiving octogenarian vs young grafts did not differ in terms of death or re-transplant (p=1.0) during the ICU stay. Similar cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, infectious and neurological postoperative complication rates were observed in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Octogenarian donors in liver transplantation grant an equivalent perioperative course to ideal young donors.

Liver Transplantation With Older Donors: A Comparison With Younger Donors in a Context of Organ Shortage

BACKGROUND

Older liver grafts have been considered in the past decade due to organ shortage. The aim was to compare outcomes after liver transplantation with either younger or older donors.

METHODS

Patients transplanted in our center between 2004 and 2014 with younger donors (younger than 60 years; n = 253) were compared with older donors (older than 75 years; n = 157). Multiorgan transplantations, split grafts, or non-heart-beating donors were not included.

RESULTS

Donors in the older group were mostly women deceased from stroke, and only 3 patients had experienced cardiac arrest. Liver tests were significantly better in the older group than in the younger group. There was no difference regarding cold ischemia time, model for end-stage liver disease score, and steatosis. There was no significant difference regarding primary nonfunction and dysfunction, hepatic artery and biliary complications, and retransplantation rates. Graft survival was not different (65% and 64% in the older and younger groups, P = 0.692). Within the older group, hepatitis C infection, retransplantation, and emergency transplantation were associated with poor graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Provided normal liver tests and the absence of cardiac arrest in donors, older liver grafts (>75 years) may be safely attributed to non-hepatitis C-infected recipients in the setting of a first and nonurgent transplantation.

Functionally Diverse NK-Like T Cells Are Effectors and Predictors of Successful Aging

The fundamental challenge of aging and long-term survivorship is maintenance of functional independence and compression of morbidity despite a life history of disease. Inasmuch as immunity is a determinant of individual health and fitness, unraveling novel mechanisms of immune homeostasis in late life is of paramount interest. Comparative studies of young and old persons have documented age-related atrophy of the thymus, the contraction of diversity of the T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire, and the intrinsic inefficiency of classical TCR signaling in aged T cells. However, the elderly have highly heterogeneous health phenotypes. Studies of defined populations of persons aged 75 and older have led to the recognition of successful aging, a distinct physiologic construct characterized by high physical and cognitive functioning without measurable disability. Significantly, successful agers have a unique T cell repertoire; namely, the dominance of highly oligoclonal αβT cells expressing a diverse array of receptors normally expressed by NK cells. Despite their properties of cell senescence, these unusual NK-like T cells are functionally active effectors that do not require engagement of their clonotypic TCR. Thus, NK-like T cells represent a beneficial remodeling of the immune repertoire with advancing age, consistent with the concept of immune plasticity. Significantly, certain subsets are predictors of physical/cognitive performance among older adults. Further understanding of the roles of these NK-like T cells to host defense, and how they integrate with other physiologic domains of function are new frontiers for investigation in Aging Biology. Such pursuits will require a research paradigm shift from the usual young-versus-old comparison to the analysis of defined elderly populations. These endeavors may also pave way to age-appropriate, group-targeted immune interventions for the growing elderly population.