Living Donor Liver Transplant for Alcoholic Liver Disease: Data from the Adult-to-adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Study

Survival benefit of living-donor liver transplantation in patients with a model for end-stage liver disease over 30 in a region with severe organ shortage: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The benefits of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients with a high Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (who have high waitlist mortality) are unclear. Regional availability of deceased-donor organs must be considered when evaluating LDLT benefits. The authors aimed to compare the survival benefit of intended-LDLT to awaiting deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in patients with a MELD score greater than or equal to 30 in a region with severe organ shortage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective review included 649 patients with a MELD score greater than or equal to 30 placed on the liver transplantation waitlist. They were divided into intended-LDLT ( n =205) or waiting-DDLT ( n =444) groups based on living-donor eligibility and compared for patient survival from the time of waitlisting. Post-transplantation outcomes of transplant recipients and living donors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Intended-LDLT patients had higher 1-year survival than waiting-DDLT patients (53.7 vs. 28.8%, P <0.001). LDLT was independently associated with lower mortality [hazard ratio (HR), 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79; P <0.001]. During follow-up, 25 patients were de-listed, 120 underwent LDLT, 170 underwent DDLT, and 334 remained on the waitlist. Among patients undergoing transplantation, the risk of post-transplantation mortality was similar for LDLT and DDLT after adjusting for pretransplantation MELD score (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 0.73-4.75; P =0.193), despite increased surgical complications after LDLT (33.1 vs. 19.4%, P =0.013). There was no mortality among living-donors, but 4.2% experienced complications of grade 3 or higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to awaiting DDLT, LDLT offers survival benefits for patients with a MELD score greater than or equal to 30, while maintaining acceptable donor outcomes. LDLT is a feasible treatment for patients with a MELD score greater than or equal to 30 in regions with severe organ shortages.

Comparing High- and Low-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Living-Donor Liver Transplantation to Determine Clinical Efficacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (CHALICE Study)

INTRODUCTION

Various studies have demonstrated that low-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients have better outcomes with improved patient survival than deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients. LDLT recipients gain the most from being transplanted at MELD <25-30; however, some existing data have outlined that LDLT may provide equivalent outcomes in high-MELD and low-MELD patients, although the term "high" MELD is arbitrarily defined in the literature and various cut-off scores are outlined between 20 and 30, although most commonly, the dividing threshold is 25. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare LDLT in high-MELD with that in low-MELD recipients to determine patient survival and graft survival, as well as perioperative and postoperative complications.

METHODS

Following PROSPERO registration CRD-42021261501, a systematic database search was conducted for the published literature between 1990 and 2021 and yielded a total of 10 studies with 2183 LT recipients; 490 were HM-LDLT recipients and 1693 were LM-LDLT recipients.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable mortality at 1, 3 and 5 years post-transplant (5-year HR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79-1.79; p-value 0.40) and graft survival (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.72, 1.63; p-value 0.71). No differences were observed in the rates of major morbidity, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary complications, intra-abdominal bleeding, wound infection and rejection; however, the HM-LDLT group had higher risk for pulmonary infection, abdominal fluid collection and prolonged ICU stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The high-MELD LDLT group had similar patient and graft survival and morbidities to the low-MELD LDLT group, despite being at higher risk for pulmonary infection, abdominal fluid collection and prolonged ICU stay. The data, primarily sourced from high-volume Asian centers, underscore the feasibility of living donations for liver allografts in high-MELD patients. Given the rising demand for liver allografts, it is sensible to incorporate these insights into U.S. transplant practices.

Which recipient pretransplant factors, such as MELD, renal function, sarcopenia, and recent sepsis influence suitability for and outcome after living donor liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

Varied access to deceased donors across the globe has resulted in differential living donor liver transplant (LDLT) practices and lack of consensus over the influence of models for end stage liver disease (MELD), renal function, sarcopenia, or recent infection on short-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

Consider these risk factors in relation to patient selection and provide recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central.

METHODS

PRIMSA systematic review and GRADE.

PROSPERO ID

RD42021260809 RESULTS: MELD >25-30 alone is not a contraindication to LDLT, and multiple studies found no increase in short term mortality in high MELD patients. Contributing factors such as muscle mass, acute physiologic assessment and chronic health evaluation score, donor age, graft weight/recipient weight ratio, and inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft influence morbidity and mortality in high MELD patients. Higher mortality is observed with pretransplant renal dysfunction, but short-term mortality is rare. Sarcopenia and recent infection are not contraindications to LDLT. Morbidity and prolonged LOS are common, and more frequent in patients with renal dysfunction, nutritional deficiency or recent infection.

CONCLUSIONS

When individual risk factors are studied mortality is low and graft loss is infrequent, but morbidity is common. MELD, especially with concomitant risk factors, had the greatest influence on short term outcome, and recent infection had the least. A multidisciplinary team of experts should carefully assess patients with multiple risk factors, and an optimal graft is recommended.

Perioperative management of adult living donor liver transplantation: Part 1 - recipients

Living donor liver transplantation was first developed to mitigate the limited access to deceased donor organs in Asia in the 1990s. This alternative liver transplantation option has become an established and widely practiced transplantation method for adult patients suffering from end-stage liver disease. It has successfully addressed the shortage of deceased donors. The Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia and the Korean Society of Transplant Anesthesia jointly reviewed published studies on the perioperative management of live donor liver transplant recipients. The review aims to offer transplant anesthesiologists and critical care physicians a comprehensive overview of the perioperative management of adult live liver transplantation recipients. We feature the status, outcomes, surgical procedure, portal venous decompression, anesthetic management, prevention of acute kidney injury, avoidance of blood transfusion, monitoring and therapeutic strategies of hemodynamic derangements, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols for liver transplant recipients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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).

Astaxanthin in Liver Health and Disease: A Potential Therapeutic Agent

Astaxanthin is a carotenoid derived from oxygen-containing non-vitamin A sources and is mainly obtained from marine organisms. Studies have demonstrated that astaxanthin is a natural antioxidant product and it is widely used in the fields of medicine, health-care products and cosmetics. Studies have shown that astaxanthin has important preventive and therapeutic effects on liver fibrosis, non-alcoholic fatty liver, liver cancer, drug and ischemia-induced liver injury, and its mechanism is related to antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities, and the regulation of multiple signaling pathways. In this review, we discuss the latest data on astaxanthin in the prevention and treatment of liver diseases. An understanding of the structure, source and mechanism of action of astaxanthin in the body would not only provide a theoretical basis for its clinical application but could also have important significance in screening and improving related compounds for the treatment of liver diseases.