Simultaneous liver and kidney transplants: optimizing use of this double resource. Transplantation. 2011;91:1305-1309. [PMID: 21512431 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0b013e31821bad1b]

Combined liver-dual kidney transplant: Role in expanded donors

Kidney injury is a common clinical feature among liver transplantation (LT) candidates that heavily affects prognosis and complicates the surgical decision-making process. Up to 20% of patients undergoing LT demonstrate some degree of renal impairment, and 2% will benefit from a combined liver-kidney transplantation (LKT). We present a case-control study of all patients who underwent LKT and combined liver-dual kidney transplantation (LDKT) from November 2013 to March 2016. For the selection of LDKT candidates, a histological-based algorithm was applied: when evaluating extended criteria donors (ECDs), with any Remuzzi score between 4 and 7, we would consider performing a LDKT instead of a simple LKT. Study groups were similar for recipient variables. In the LDKT group, donor age, donor risk index, and donor body mass index were found to be significantly higher. Biopsies obtained from all pairs of kidney grafts in the LDKT group demonstrated the following Remuzzi scores: 4+4, 4+4, 7+1, 4+5. Despite longer operative times for the LDKT procedure, no differences were observed regarding the main investigated outcome parameters. Overall survival was 100% (LDKT) and 91% (LKT, P > 0.99). This is a preliminary experience which might indicate that LDKT is a safe, feasible, and resource-effective technique. The evaluation of a larger cohort, as well as the experience from other centers, would be needed to clearly identify its role in the ECD era. Liver Transplantation 23:28-34 2017 AASLD.

Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplantation in Adults: A Single-center Experience Comparing Results With Isolated Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

After introduction of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in 2002, a worldwide increasing number of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantations (SLKTx) has been observed. However, organ shortage puts into question the allocation of 2 grafts to 1 recipient. This retrospective, single-center study compared SLKTx results with isolated liver transplantation (LTx).

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2013, 37 SLKTx were performed in adult recipients. Every SLKTx was matched by donor age (±5 years) and transplantation date with 2 LTx (n = 74). Pretransplant, intraoperative, and post-transplant variables were collected; liver graft and patient survivals were calculated.

RESULTS

As expected, donor age was similar in the 2 groups (median, 39.7 years), whereas serum creatinine level, glomerular filtration rate, and MELD and D-MELD (donor age*MELD) scores were significantly higher in the SLKTx group. SLKTx had longer waiting list time (P = .0034) as well as higher surgical difficulty, testified by more blood transfusions (P = .0083), increased use of classic caval reconstruction (P = .0024), and more frequent need of abdominal packing for bleeding control (P = .0003). In addition, duration of hospital stay (P < .0001), second-look surgery (P = .0082), post-transplant dialysis (P < .0001), and post-transplant infections (P = .04) were significantly greater in SLKTx group. Acute rejection episodes involving the liver were significantly less in SLKTx than in LTx (14% vs 41%; P = .0045). Liver graft and patient survival at 10 years after transplantation was similar in the 2 groups (liver graft: SLKTx, 80% vs LTx, 77% [P = .85]; patient: SLKTx, 86% vs LTx, 79% [P = .56]).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being technically challenging, SLKTx provided excellent long-term results and was shown to be an effective use of liver grafts.

Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplantation

In 2014, simultaneous liver kidney transplants (SLK) accounted for 8.2 % of all liver transplants performed in the USA. Prior to introduction of the model of end stage liver disease (MELD) system, SLK accounted for 2.5 % in 2001 and only 1.7 % in 1990. Transplant centers have struggled to balance the moral and ethical aspects of SLK in the setting of organ scarcity with an algorithm that best qualifies patients for such treatment options. Few centers have even ventured into DCD territory for SLK. Advancement in immunosuppression protocols and treatment of HCV and HIV have impacted SLK over the years. Simulation modeling has allowed us to analyze the future impact of our decisions that are made today. All of these advancements have given, and will continue to give new perspectives to SLK. The purpose of this review article is to highlight these advances and bring to light the studies that have made this transplant option successful.

Simulation modeling of the impact of proposed new simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation policies

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of kidney grafts for simultaneous liver and kidney (SLK) transplants is causing concern about the most effective utilization of scarce kidney graft resources. This study evaluated the impact of implementing the proposed United Network for Organ Sharing SLK transplant policy on outcomes for end-stage liver disease (ESLD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients awaiting transplant.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to simulate a hypothetical cohort of ESLD patients over a 30-year time horizon starting from age 50. The model applies the different criteria being considered in the United Network for Organ Sharing policy and tallies outcomes, including numbers of procedures and life years after liver transplant alone (LTA) or SLK transplant.

RESULTS

When 1-week pretransplant dialysis duration is required, the numbers of SLK transplants and LTAs would be 648 and 9,065, respectively. If the pretransplant dialysis duration is extended to 12 weeks, there would be 240 SLK transplants and 9,426 LTAs. This change results in a decrease of 6,483 life years among SLK transplant recipients and an increase of 4,971 life years among LTA recipients. However, by increasing the dialysis duration to 12 weeks from 1 week, 408 kidney grafts would be released to the kidney waitlist because of the decline in SLK transplants; this yields 796 additional life years gained among ESRD patients.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the proposed SLK transplant policy could restore access to kidney transplants for patients with ESRD albeit at the detriment of patients with ESLD and renal impairment.

Management of patients with hepatitis B in special populations

The development of effective nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) against hepatitis B virus (HBV) has improved the outcome of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This review updates issues related to the management of CHB patients included in special populations. Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF) represent the currently recommended first-line NAs in patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis. The combination of HBV immunoglobulin (usually for a finite duration) and NA is considered the standard of care for prophylaxis against HBV recurrence after liver transplantation. TDF is the best choice for hemodialysis patients and in patients with chronic kidney disease with nucleoside resistance. ETV and telbivudine are the preferred options in naïve renal transplant recipients and with low viremia levels, respectively. All hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive candidates should be treated with NAs before renal transplantation to achieve undetectable HBV DNA at the time of transplantation. Conventional interferon or NAs can also be used in children, on the basis of well-established therapeutic indication. Pregnant women at high risk of perinatal transmission could be treated with lamivudine, telbivudine or TDF in the last trimester of pregnancy. HBsAg-positive patients under immunosuppression should receive NA pre-emptively (regardless of HBV DNA levels) up to 12 mo after its cessation. In HBsAg negative, anti-HBc positive patients under immunosuppression, further studies are needed to form a final conclusion; however, it seems that anti-HBV prophylaxis is justified in such patients with hematological diseases and/or for those receiving rituximab-containing regimens, regardless of their anti-HBs or serum HBV DNA status.

Evolving frequency and outcomes of simultaneous liver kidney transplants based on liver disease etiology

BACKGROUND

The frequency of simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) transplantation is increasing. Data are scanty on outcomes of SLK transplants for liver disease etiology.

METHODS

Outcomes for liver and kidney grafts and patients survival at 5 years were compared for liver disease etiology among adults receiving SLK during 2002 and 2011 in the United States. Cox regression analysis models were built to determine the independent impact of liver disease etiology on outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2,606 patients (mean age 53 years, 69% males, 55% Caucasians) received SLK for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC, n=76), primary sclerosing cholangitis (n=81), hepatitis C virus (HCV) (n=945), alcoholic liver disease (n=495), alcohol and HCV (n=152), cryptogenic cirrhosis (CC, n=289), nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) (n=221), hepatitis B virus (HBV) (n=98), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n=249). HCV and NASH+CC contributed to about 44% and 9%, respectively, of all SLK transplants in 2002. Corresponding figures in 2011 were 34% and 22%, respectively. Compared to PBC, 5-year outcomes were worse for NASH, HCV, and HCC for liver graft (72%, 66%, and 72% vs. 82%; hazard ratio, HR: 2.5-3.1), kidney graft (71%, 65%, and 71% vs. 80%; HR: 2.3-2.8), and patient survival (74%, 69%, and 69% vs. 82%; HR: 2.4-2.7). Follow-up renal function assessed at 1, 3, and 5 years showed poor renal function among patients receiving SLK for HCV, NASH, CC, and HBV.

CONCLUSIONS

Frequency of SLK transplants is increasing among NASH patients. Overall graft and patient outcomes are good. However, SLK for NASH, HCV, and HCC do worse. Strategies are needed to improve outcomes for SLK in HCV and NASH patients.

Renal dysfunction in end-stage liver disease and post-liver transplant

Renal dysfunction is a frequent complication in patients with end-stage liver disease awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation and in the post-liver transplant period. Although the stereotypical form of renal dysfunction is the hepatorenal syndrome, other causes of acute kidney injury in this population include prerenal azotemia and acute tubular necrosis. Renal injury in a patient with cirrhosis is associated with a poor prognosis.

Μanagement of patients with hepatitis B and C before and after liver and kidney transplantation

New nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance (such as entecavir, tenofovir) have improved the prognosis of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis and have prevented HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). NAs are considered the most proper approach for HBV infection in patients under renal replacement therapy but their doses should be adjusted according to the patient's creatinine clearance. In addition, physicians should be aware of the potential nephrotoxicity. However, patients with chronic hepatitis C and decompensated cirrhosis can receive only one therapeutic option before LT, as well as for Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after LT, which is the combination of subcutaneous Peg-IFN and ribavirin. Generally, therapy for HCV after renal transplantation should be avoided. Although the optimal antiviral therapy for HCV infection has not been established, attention has turned to a new, oral direct acting antiviral treatment which marks a promising strategy in prognosis and in amelioration of these diseases.

First successful case of simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation for patients with chronic liver and renal failure in Japan

Establishment of a preferential liver allocation rule for simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation (SLK) and revisions of laws regarding organ transplants from deceased donors have paved the way for SLK in Japan. Very few cases of SLK have been attempted in Japan, and no such recipients have survived for longer than 40 days. The present report describes a case of a 50-year-old woman who had undergone living donor liver transplantation at the age of 38 years for management of post-partum liver failure. After the first transplant surgery, she developed hepatic vein stenosis and severe hypersplenism requiring splenectomy. She was then initiated on hemodialysis (HD) due to the deterioration of renal function after insertion of a hepatic vein stent. She was listed as a candidate for SLK in 2011 because she required frequent plasma exchange for hepatic coma. When her Model for End-stage Liver Disease score reached 46, the new liver was donated 46 days after registration. The reduced trisegment liver and the kidney grafts were simultaneously transplanted under veno-venous bypass and intraoperative HD. The hepatic artery was reconstructed prior to portal reconstruction in order to shorten anhepatic time. Although she developed subcapsular bleeding caused by hepatic contusion on the next day, subsequent hemostasis was obtained by transcatheter embolization. Thereafter, her recovery was uneventful, except for mild rejection and renal tubular acidosis of the kidney graft. This case highlights the need to establish Japanese criteria for SLK.

Outcomes of simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation in relation to a high level of preformed donor-specific antibodies

BACKGROUND

The protective effect of the liver allograft when simultaneously transplanted with a kidney in the setting of allosensitization is unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed the significance of sensitization, defined based on positive cytotoxicity crossmatches, positive flow cytometry crossmatches, and/or the presence of high levels of donor-specific antibodies, on the outcomes of simultaneous liver and kidney (SLK) transplantation. We reviewed 56 SLK performed at our center through December 31, 2011 and identified 13 patients who met high sensitization criteria.

RESULTS

Median patient survival was not significantly different: 86 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 47-135) for nonsensitized patients versus 151 months (95% CI, 4 to ∞) for sensitized patients (P=0.5). The 5-year survival was 67% (95% CI, 0.5-0.8) in the nonsensitized group and 64% (95% CI, 0.3-0.9) in the sensitized group. There were six renal allograft failures in the nonsensitized group but none in the sensitized group. The adjusted hazard ratios associated with the risk of death or the combined risk of death or renal allograft failure were 0.7 (95% CI, 0.1-3.8) and 0.4 (95% CI, 0.1-2.2) for sensitized versus nonsensitized patients. There were significantly more renal allograft rejections in the sensitized group (5 vs. 1; P=0.002) in the first year after transplantation, only one showing C4d positivity. Creatinine levels at 1 year after transplantation were similar: 1.5 mg/dL in the nonsensitized group versus 1.36 mg/dL in the sensitized group (P=0.6).

CONCLUSION

Sensitization does not appear to have a significant negative impact on the survival of SLK patients.

Treatment of hepatitis B in patients with chronic kidney disease

Although the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients with chronic kidney disease remains low in developed countries, clinicians should be aware of the rationale for treatment in this setting. This patient population presents particular features and various complicating conditions requiring special treatment strategies. Interferon, the standard treatment for HBV infection, has been poorly tolerated by patients with chronic kidney disease, has presented relatively low efficacy, and has posed renal transplant recipients under the risk of acute rejection. The advent of effective nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) has offered the opportunity to minimize the consequences of HBV infection in HBV-positive patients with chronic kidney disease. Combination with immunosuppressive agents might be considered in cases of rapid renal function deterioration and/or severe proteinuria. Among the newer NAs, entecavir may be preferred, because of its high potency, high genetic barrier to resistance, and favorable renal safety profile. However, entecavir presented low efficacy in case of lamivudine or telbivudine resistance, and thus tenofovir may be a better option in that setting. All HBsAg-positive candidates should be treated with NAs before renal transplantation in order to maintain undetectable HBV DNA, reduce liver fibrosis, and prevent hepatic decompensation after renal transplantation. This review summarizes updated issues related to treatment of chronic HBV infection in all categories of population with chronic kidney disease (those exhibiting HBV-associated glomerular disease, those treated with hemodialysis, as well as renal transplant candidates, donors, and recipients).

Renal dysfunction and the liver transplant recipient; novel strategies for determination of reversibility and renal protective therapies pretransplant and posttransplant

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Renal dysfunction is one of the most common and important complications in liver transplant candidates and recipients. Recent publications have highlighted important developments in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Inclusion of the serum creatinine in the Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score has led to an increased number of liver transplant candidates and recipients with renal dysfunction. The development of posttransplant renal dysfunction negatively impacts patient survival. Therefore, the careful identification of appropriate candidates for simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplant is critical. Recent publications have helped in the appropriate selection of SLK recipients. One of the most important strategies to help mitigate renal dysfunction in liver transplant recipients is the careful management of immunosuppression.

SUMMARY

Important contributing factors to posttransplant renal dysfunction include pretransplant renal disease and immunosuppression, namely calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs). One of the most effective means of preventing posttransplant renal failure is observation of the defined criteria for selecting patients for SLK. In addition, avoidance and minimization of CNIs may help to mitigate posttransplant renal disease.

Combined liver-kidney transplantation is preferable to liver transplant alone for cirrhotic patients with renal failure

BACKGROUND

The role of combined liver-kidney transplantation (CLKT) for cirrhotic patients with renal failure (RF) is controversial. Since the model for end-stage liver disease era, there has been a rise in the number of CLKT. Using the Organ Procurement Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database, this study was undertaken to compare outcomes of cirrhotic patients with RF who received either liver transplant alone (LTA) or CLKT between 2002 and 2008.

METHODS

Analysis was limited to cirrhotic patients 18 years old or older, with serum creatinine level 2.5 mg/dL or higher at the time of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) or who received dialysis at least twice during the week before OLT. Patients who received CLKT were categorized based on the cause of their underlying RF.

RESULTS

Overall liver allograft and patient survival rates of LTA patients were significantly lower compared with CLKT patients (P<0.001). CLKT patients with hepatorenal syndrome showed significantly higher patient and liver allograft survival rates. Liver allograft survival was superior among CLKT patients irrespective of whether they received dialysis. Prevalence of posttransplantation RF was higher for LTA patients at 6 months and 3 years of follow-up (P<0.001). LTA was a significant risk factor both for graft loss and mortality. Recipient hepatitis C virus seropositivity, donor age, donor cause of death, and life support at the time of OLT were also risk factors for graft loss and death.

CONCLUSIONS

Cirrhotic patients with RF, in particular with hepatorenal syndrome, CLKT is preferable to LTA because it improves liver allograft and patient survival.

Long-term outcome after liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a life-saving therapy for patients with end-stage liver disease, acute liver failure, and liver tumors. Over the past 4 decades, improvements in surgical techniques, peritransplant intensive care, and immunosuppressive regimens have resulted in significant improvements in short-term survival. Focus has now shifted to addressing long-term complications and improving quality of life in liver recipients. These include adverse effects of immunosuppression; recurrence of the primary liver disease; and management of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular disease, renal dysfunction, osteoporosis, and de novo malignancy. Issues such as posttransplant depression, employment, sexual function, fertility, and pregnancy must not be overlooked, as they have a direct impact on the liver recipient's quality of life. This review summarizes the latest data in long-term outcome after liver transplantation.

Renal Dysfunction in Liver Transplant Candidates: Evaluation, Classification and Management in Contemporary Practice

Renal dysfunction is a common comorbidity in patients with liver failure and is a well-established predictor of both morbidity and mortality among patients awaiting liver transplantation. The etiology of renal failure in patients with cirrhosis can be functional, structural, or represent a combination of potentially reversible physiologic changes and permanent histologic damage. Diagnostic criteria for acute and chronic kidney disease have been established, but cirrhosis poses challenges for accurate assessment of renal function with conventional clinical methods such as serum creatinine and creatinine-based estimating equations. Renal biopsies can have an important role for defining permanent structural damage as part of the pre-transplant evaluation of patients with liver disease; however, coagulopathy, portal hypertension and ascites increase the risk of biopsy-associated complications in cirrhotic patients. While renal dysfunction due to hepatorenal physiology is potentially reversible after liver transplantation, simultaneous kidney liver transplantation and kidney after liver transplant can also improve outcomes in a subset of patients with irreversible renal injury.

Management of renal dysfunction in patients receiving a liver transplant

Renal dysfunction is a frequent complication in patients with endstage liver disease awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation. Although the stereotypical form of renal dysfunction is the hepatorenal syndrome, common causes of acute kidney injury include prerenal azotemia and acute tubular necrosis in this population. Management involves hemodynamic support, renal replacement therapy, and mitigation of risk factors. Renal dysfunction in a cirrhotic patient usually implies a poor prognosis in the absence of liver transplantation. An important issue is the frequent need for kidney, in addition to liver, transplantation if renal insufficiency has been persistent in a decompensated cirrhotic.