Kidney Transplantation After Previous Liver Transplantation: Analysis of the Organ Procurement Transplant Network Database

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Evolving challenges with long-term care of liver transplant recipients

The number of liver transplants (LT) performed worldwide continues to rise, and LT recipients are living longer post-transplant. This has led to an increasing number of LT recipients requiring lifelong care. Optimal care post-LT requires careful attention to both the allograft and systemic issues that are more common after organ transplantation. Common causes of allograft dysfunction include rejection, biliary complications, and primary disease recurrence. While immunosuppression prevents rejection and reduces incidences of some primary disease recurrence, it has detrimental systemic effects. Most commonly, these include increased incidences of metabolic syndrome, various malignancies, and infections. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to optimize immunosuppression regimens to prevent allograft dysfunction while also decreasing the risk of systemic complications. Institutional protocols to screen for systemic disease and heightened clinical suspicion also play an important role in providing optimal long-term post-LT care. In this review, we discuss these common complications of LT as well as unique considerations when caring for LT recipients in the years after transplant.

Hepatorenal Syndrome and Other Post-Liver Transplantation Complications: Case Studies and Literature Review

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) was originally defined as a renal dysfunction caused by a decreased renal perfusion due to hemodynamic disturbances in the arterial circulation and an excessive activity of endogenous vasoactive systems in the course of cirrhosis. Considering the latest research, this syndrome may have a more complex pathomechanism. Equally often as in cirrhosis, HRS develops after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx) and worsens the prognosis significantly increasing mortality rates in this patient population. The prevalence of renal complications after OLTx and their negative prognostic impact on the survival of both the graft and the recipient prompted the authors of this work to analyze in detail 2 cases of HRS after OLTx to indicate the multiplicity of factors contributing to the pathophysiology of this syndrome. Attention was paid to risk factors for HRS found in the anamnesis before OLTx, especially a pre-existing renal dysfunction. In both cases early post-OLTx complications associated with the transplantation procedure were described: destabilization of the circulatory system, transfusions of blood products, prolonged stay at an intensive care unit, and necessity of introducing continuous renal replacement therapy. In the later period after the OLTx, infections (bacterial, fungal, viral) and drug nephrotoxicity, including the activity of immunosuppressants (tacrolimus), contributed primarily to the renal function impairment.

Pros and Cons of the Safety Net Rule for Prioritization of Liver Transplant Recipients Who Receive Liver Alone Transplant but Develop End-Stage Renal Disease

The number of patients presenting with cirrhosis with kidney injury and the potential need for SLKT is increasing. In 2017, standardized criteria were implemented to identify candidates for SLKT as well as criteria for prioritizing LTA recipients for kidney transplant if they developed kidney failure, which is referred to as the 'safety net rule.' Goal of the safety net rule is to provide a pathway that provides increased priority to LTA recipients with renal failure who may have previously undergone SLKT. This article reviews the pros and cons of the safety net rule for liver transplant recipients who develop ESRD.

Utilization and effectiveness of the organ procurement and transplantation network "safety-net" policy

BACKGROUND

Liver transplant recipients with persistent renal dysfunction may be prioritized on the kidney transplant waitlist based on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network "safety-net" policy implemented in 2017. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utilization of kidney transplant and posttransplant outcomes, of liver transplant recipients with persistent renal dysfunction before and after implementation of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network kidney safety-net policy and standardization of simultaneous liver-kidney requirements.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database from January 2015 to March 2019, outcomes of liver transplant recipients listed for kidney transplant and the subset who received kidney after liver transplants were compared before and after policy implementation.

RESULTS

Liver transplant recipients listed for kidney transplant increased from 58 to 200, and kidney after liver transplants increased from 29.3% to 42.5% after safety-net policy implementation. Post-policy kidney after liver transplants received more local organs (91.8% vs 70.6%, P = .03) and trended toward shorter waitlist time (47 [17-123] vs 84 [37-226] days, P = .051). The pre- and post-policy cohorts had similar (P > .05) kidney donor profile index (0.43 [0.27-0.69] vs 0.42 [0.28-0.58]) and delayed graft function (11.8% vs 14.1%). Patient, kidney graft, and liver graft survival were similar (P > .05) between pre and post-policy cohorts. Patient and kidney graft survival were similar between kidney after liver transplants and propensity score-matched kidney transplant alone recipients. Patient, kidney, and liver graft survival were similar between kidney after liver transplants and propensity score-matched simultaneous liver-kidney transplant recipients.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that after Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network "safety-net" policy implementation, there has been an increase in liver transplant recipients with renal dysfunction who are listed for and undergo kidney transplant with excellent short-term results.

Kidney After Liver Transplantation Matched-pair Analysis: Are Kidneys Allocated to Appropriate Patients to Maximize Their Survival?

BACKGROUND

Kidney after liver transplantation (KALT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage renal disease after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). New allocation policies prioritize kidneys to patients in renal failure within the first year following OLT. There is little data on how kidney quality, measured by kidney donor profile index (KDPI), impacts KALT survival outcomes.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult KALT recipients from 1988 to 2015 and compared to their paired kidney transplant alone (KTA) recipients. Seven hundred forty-five pairs were stratified into 3 KDPI subgroups and compared patient survival, graft survival, and death-censored graft survival among matched-paired recipients.

RESULTS

Overall, KTA recipients had superior patient and graft survival compared with the KALT group. KTA patient survival was superior for all 3 KDPI subgroups analysis. KTA graft survival was superior compared with KALT recipients of KDPI 21%-85% kidneys. Inferior graft half-life was observed in KALT versus KTA recipients with KDPI 21%-85% and >85%.

CONCLUSIONS

From a utilitarian perspective, it is important that kidneys are allocated to recipients that are able to maximize their benefit from the full life of the organ. In KTA recipients, graft quality correlates directly to graft survival. However, in KALT patients receiving the matched-pair kidneys of the KTA recipients, patient mortality, rather than kidney quality, dictates graft survival significantly. As allocation practices continue developing, utilization of expanded criteria kidneys that better match anticipated patient and graft survival should be strongly considered to maximize the benefits of limited resources for the greatest number of patients.

Outcomes of liver-kidney transplantation in patients with primary hyperoxaluria: an analysis of the scientific registry of transplant recipients database

Background

Primary hyperoxaluria (PH) is an inherited disease lacking of hepatic oxalic acid metabolic enzymes which could lead to irreverisible renal damage. Currently, liver–kidney transplantation is a curative but highly invasive therapy used to treat patients with PH. However, limited studies have focused on combined liver–kidney transplantation (CLKT) and sequential liver and kidney transplantation (SLKT) in patients with PH.

Methods

The present study included 201 patients with PH who received both liver and kidney transplants and who were listed on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from 1987 to 2018. According to the liver–kidney transplant procedure, patients were separated into a CLKT group and a SLKT group. Patient demographics and transplant outcomes were assessed in each group.

Results

Compared with the SLKT group, The CLKT group got a worse pretransplant dialysis condition in both the proportion of patients under pretransplant dialysis (p = 0.048) and the duration of the pretransplant dialysis (p < 0.001). The SLKT group got higher human leukocyte antigen mismatch score of kidney donor (p < 0.001) and liver donor (p = 0.003). The CLKT group utilized higher proportion (98.9%) of organs from a single deceased donor, while the SLKT group utilized 75.0% of organs from deceased liver donors and only 35.0% of organs from deceased kidney donors (p < 0.001). Kidney function measured by serum creatinine concentration before liver transplantation (LT) or CLKT was similar (p = 0.305) between groups. Patient survival was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.717) and liver (p = 0.685) and kidney (p = 0.464) graft outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions

SLKT seems to be an alternative option with strict condition for CLKT, further exploration about the SLKT is still required.

Diagnosis and management of renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis

Introduction: Renal dysfunction commonly occurs in patients with cirrhosis and is typically associated with poor prognosis. Several pathophysiologic mechanisms are responsible for renal disease in these patients, prompt identification permits individualized management.Areas covered: Pathophysiology, evaluation and differential diagnosis, management and prognosis of renal disease in patients with cirrhosis. Special focus on management of hepatorenal syndrome and indications for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation.Literature search methodology: a detailed literature search was performed using PubMed without date restrictions. Published guidelines and position papers were also used and cross-referenced to identify additional studies.Expert opinion: The prognostic significance of renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis is highlighted by the inclusion of serum creatinine in the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD). Both acute and chronic renal dysfunction result in increased mortality in patients with cirrhosis, although there are marked differences related to the etiology of renal disease. Early recognition and prompt intervention determined by the most likely etiology are key in the management of these patients. Simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation improves patient survival compared to isolated liver transplantation in patients with cirrhosis and persistent renal impairment; however, selection of candidates must be judicious and individualized due to the ongoing shortage of donor kidneys.

Outcomes in Older Kidney Transplant Recipients After Prior Nonkidney Transplants

BACKGROUND

Recipients of nonkidney solid organ transplants (nkSOT) are living longer, and 11%-18% will develop end stage renal disease (ESRD). While our general inclination is to treat nkSOT recipients who develop ESRD with a kidney transplant (KT), an increasing number are developing ESRD at an older age where KT may not be the most appropriate treatment. It is possible that the risk of older age and prior nkSOT might synergize to make KT too risky, but this has never been explored.

METHODS

To examine death-censored graft loss and mortality for KT recipients with and without prior nkSOT, we used Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data to identify 42 089 older (age ≥65) KT recipients between 1995 and 2016. Additionally, to better understand treatment options for these patients and survival benefit of KT, we identified 5023 older (age ≥65) with prior nkSOT recipients listed for subsequent KT, of whom 863 received transplants.

RESULTS

Compared with 41 159 older KT recipients without prior nkSOT, death-censored graft loss was similar (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.93-1.37, P = 0.2), but mortality (aHR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.28-1.54, P < 0.001) was greater for older KT recipients with prior nkSOT. Nonetheless, in a survival benefit model (survival with versus without the transplant), among older prior nkSOT recipients, KT decreased the risk of mortality by more than half (aHR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.42-0.54, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Older prior nkSOT recipients who subsequently develop ESRD derive survival benefit from KT, but graft longevity is limited by overall survival in this population. These findings can help guide patient counseling for this challenging population.

Liver Retransplantation Associated With Kidney Transplantation for End-stage Liver Graft Disease and Renal Insufficiency: A Morbid Procedure on a Unique Subgroup of Patients

BACKGROUND

Chronic renal disease (CKD) jeopardizes the long-term outcomes of liver transplant recipients. In patients with end-stage liver graft disease and CKD, liver retransplantation associated with kidney transplantation (ReLT-KT) might be necessary. Yet, this specific subset of patients remains poorly described.

METHODS

Indications, perioperative characteristics, and short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing ReLT-KT at 2 transplantation units from 1994 to 2012 were analyzed. Risk factors for postoperative mortality and long-term survivals were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 3060 patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT), 45 (1.5%) underwent ReLT-KT. The proportion of ReLT-KT among LT recipients continuously grew throughout the study period from 0.3% to 2.4% (P < 0.001). Median time from primary LT to ReLT-KT was 151.3 (7.5-282.9) months. The most frequent indications for liver retransplantation were recurrence of the primary liver disease and cholangitis in 15 (33.3%) cases each. CKD was related to calcineurin inhibitors toxicity in 38 (84.4%) cases. Twelve (26.7%) patients died postoperatively. D-MELD (donor age × recipients' MELD) was associated with postoperative mortality (HR: 8.027; 95% CI: 2.387-18.223; P = 0.026) and optimal cut-off value was 1039 (AUC: 0.801; P = 0.002). Overall 1, 3, and 5 years survivals were 68.8%, 65.9%, and 59.5%, respectively. D-MELD > 1039 was the only factor associated with poor survival (P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

ReLT-KT is a highly morbid increasingly performed procedure. Refinements in the selection of grafts and transplant candidates are required to limit the postoperative mortality of these patients.

Combined liver-kidney transplantation versus liver transplant alone based on KDIGO stratification of estimated glomerular filtration rate: data from the United Kingdom Transplant registry - a retrospective cohort study

Patient selection for combined liver-kidney transplantation (CLKT) is a current issue on the background of organ shortage. This study aimed to compare outcomes and post-transplant renal function for patients receiving CLKT and liver transplantation alone (LTA) based on native renal function using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) stratification. Using the UK National transplant database (NHSBT) 6035 patients receiving a LTA (N = 5912; 98%) or CLKT (N = 123; 2%) [2001-2013] were analysed, and stratified by KDIGO stages of eGFR at transplant (eGFR group-strata). There was no difference in patient/graft survival between LTA and CLKT in eGFR group-strata (P > 0.05). Of 377 patients undergoing renal replacement therapy (RRT) at time of transplantation, 305 (81%) and 72 (19%) patients received LTA and CLKT respectively. A significantly greater proportion of CLKT patients had severe end-stage renal disease (eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m² ) at 1 year post-transplant compared to LTA (9.5% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.001). Patient and graft survival benefit for patients on RRT at transplantation was favouring CLKT versus LTA (P = 0.038 and P = 0.018, respectively) but the renal function of the long-term survivors was not superior following CLKT. The data does not support CLKT approach based on eGFR alone, and the advantage of CLKT appear to benefit only those who are on established RRT at the time of transplant.

Chronic kidney disease in liver transplantation: Evaluation of kidney function

Chronic kidney disease is one of the main comorbidities affecting liver transplant recipients. Most of those patients have some degree of acute or chronic kidney dysfunction at the time of transplantation, moreover they can also develop de novo chronic kidney disease once transplanted. An important increase in the incidence of chronic kidney disease in the «MELD era» has been observed. This phenomenon has partially been attributed to the weight that kidney function carries for organ allocation. In addition, the generalized use of calcineurin inhibitors has also been a contributing factor. It is of the utmost importance for us to be familiar with the current methods for evaluating kidney function before and after a liver transplantation. The two main biomarkers available today for that purpose are serum creatinine and cystatin C. Several equations have been derived from those biomarkers and have been tested in that context with mixed results, due to their biologic variability and the lack of standardization in their measurement. The gold standard continues to be the direct determination of the glomerular filtration rate through different methods; however, that is only done for research purposes. It is also essential to know the current classification of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease in order to make early diagnosis. The present review focuses on the recognition, diagnosis, and classification of chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury in liver transplantation recipients.

Liver Transplant Recipients With End-Stage Renal Disease Largely Benefit From Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) after liver transplant (LT) has increased. The actual benefit of kidney transplantation (KT) is not completely understood in LT recipients with ESRD.

METHODS

We analyzed Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data for all KT candidates with prior LT from 1998 to 2014; the benefits of KT relative to remaining on dialysis were compared by means of multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

The number of these KT candidates with prior LT has tripled from 98 in 1998 to 323 in 2015; LT recipients with ESRD remaining on dialysis have a 2.5-times increase in the risk of liver graft failure and a 3.6-times increase in the risk of patient death compared with these patients receiving KT. The adjusted liver graft and patient survival rates after donors from donation after cardiac death or expanded-criteria donor kidney transplantation were significantly higher than in patients remaining on dialysis in LT recipients with ESRD.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of referrals to KT with prior LT is increasing at a rapid rate. Remaining on dialysis in LT recipients with ESRD has profound increased risks of liver graft failure and patient death in comparison to receiving a KT. LT recipients with ESRD can benefit from expanded-criteria donor and donation after cardiac death kidney transplantation.

Liver alone or simultaneous liver-kidney transplant? Pretransplant chronic kidney disease and post-transplant outcome - a retrospective study

The new Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Organ Sharing Network (OPTN/UNOS) simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (SLK) policy has been implemented. The aim of this study was to review liver transplant outcomes utilizing the new SLK policy. Liver transplant alone (LTA) and SLK patients between 2009 and 2015 were reviewed. Graft survival and post-transplant kidney function were investigated among LTA patients meeting the chronic kidney disease (CKD) criteria of the new policy (LTA-CKD group). To validate our findings, we reviewed and applied our analysis to the OPTN/UNOS registry. A total of 535 patients were eligible from our series. The LTA-CKD group (n = 27) showed worse 1-year graft survival, compared with the SLK group (n = 44), but not significant (81% vs. 93%, P = 0.15). The LTA-CKD group significantly increased a risk of post-transplant dialysis (odds ratio = 5.59 [95% CI = 1.27-24.7], P = 0.02 [Ref. normal kidney function]). Post-transplant dialysis was an independent risk factor for graft loss (hazard ratio = 7.25, 95% CI = 3.3-15.91, P < 0.001 [Ref. SLK]). In the validation analysis based on the OPTN/UNOS registry, the hazard of 1-year-graft loss in the LTA-CKD group (n = 751) was 34.8% higher than the SLK group (n = 2856) (hazard ratio = 1.348, 95% CI = 1.157-1.572, P < 0.001). Indicating SLK for patients who meet the CKD criteria may significantly improve transplant outcomes.

Fatigue After Liver Transplant and Combined Liver and Kidney Transplant

OBJECTIVES

To date, fatigue is still poorly understood in recipients of orthotopic liver transplant and simultaneous/sequential liver and kidney transplant procedures. The present study examined the appearance of fatigue in patients who received orthotopic liver and sequential liver and kidney transplant procedures compared with the general population and the influence of various clinical and socioeconomic factors on fatigue levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory survey was sent to all patients with a history of orthotopic liver and simultaneous/sequential liver and kidney transplant. The results were compared to data from a reference population.

RESULTS

Our survey included 276 eligible patients: 256 recipients (92.7%) of orthotopic liver transplant and 20 recipients (7.3%) of simultaneous/sequential liver and kidney transplant. Significantly lower fatigue scores were found in the general population compared with both transplant groups (P < .001). There were also no significant differences between the transplant groups. Among the clinical and socioeconomic factors, history of hepatocellular carcinoma, chronic kidney disease, age, family status, and education had a significant impact on fatigue levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to compare fatigue in recipients of orthotopic liver and simultaneous/sequential liver and kidney transplant. We found that fatigue is an important but still poorly understood outcome after transplant.

Outcome and natural course of renal dysfunction in liver transplant recipients with severely impaired kidney function prior to transplantation

Background

Since introduction of the MELD score in the liver allograft allocation system, renal insufficiency has emerged as an increasing problem. Here we evaluated the course of kidney function in patients with advanced renal insufficiency prior to liver transplantation (LT).

Methods

A total of 254 patients undergoing LT at the University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (2011-2015) were screened for renal impairment (GFR < 30 ml/min) prior to LT in this observational study.

Results

Eighty (32%) patients (median 60 years; M/F: 48/32) had significant renal impairment prior to LT. Median follow-up post-LT was 619 days. Patient survival at 90 days, one year and two years was 76%, 66% and 64%, respectively. Need for dialysis postoperatively but not preoperatively was associated with increased mortality (p < 0.05). Renal function improved in 75% of survivors, but 78% of patients had chronic kidney disease ≥ stage 3 at end of follow-up. Of eight (16%) survivors remaining on long-term dialysis, so far only four patients have received a kidney transplant.

Conclusion

Postoperative dialysis affected long-term mortality. In 75% of survivors renal function improved, but still the majority of patients had an impaired renal function (CKD stage 3-5) at end of follow-up. Future studies should elucidate the impact of kidney dysfunction and dialysis on recipients' long-term survival.

Kidney Transplant Outcomes After Primary, Repeat and Kidney After Nonrenal Solid Organ Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience

Background

Improvements in renal allograft outcomes have permitted kidney transplantation after prior kidney allograft failure as well as after nonrenal solid organ transplantation. This study compares renal allograft outcomes in the 3 groups, that is, primary, repeat, and kidney after nonrenal solid organ transplantation, where transplant group was coded as a time-dependent variable.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed registry data for kidney transplant recipients at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from January 2000 to December 2011. We compared overall graft survival between the 3 groups using Cox regression modeling. We calculated 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival and half-lives for each group where feasible.

Results

The study cohort (N = 2014) consisted of group A (primary kidney transplant, n = 1578, with 7923.2 years of follow-up time), group B (repeat kidney transplant, n = 314, with 1566.7 years of follow-up time) and group C (kidney post-nonrenal solid organ transplant, n = 176, with 844.8 years of follow-up time). Of the 1578 patients in the primary kidney transplant group, 74 later received a repeat transplant and thus also have follow-up counted in the repeat kidney transplant group. The median follow-up was 56, 53, and 55 months, respectively. The 5-year actuarial and death-censored graft survival was 68.69%, 68.79%, and 66.48% and 65.53%, 67.68%, and 62.92%, respectively (P = 0.70). There was no difference in overall graft survival in the Cox-adjusted analysis (group B: odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.26; P = 0.79; group C: odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.23; P = 0.76).

Conclusions

The adjusted kidney graft survivals in the 3 groups were similar.

Renal Function and Transplantation in Liver Disease

Kidney injury is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in liver transplant recipients. Since the introduction of the model for end-stage liver disease for the allocation of organs for liver transplantation in 2002, the heavy weighting of serum creatinine in the model for end-stage liver disease score has significantly increased the incidence of renal dysfunction seen among patients undergoing liver transplantation. As a result, the frequency of simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplantation compared to liver transplantation alone (LTA) has also increased. The decision to perform SLK rather than LTA is an important one because the benefits to the liver transplant recipient receiving a kidney transplant must be balanced with the benefits of using that organ for a patient with end-stage renal disease. However, predicting whether or not a patient with liver failure has reversible kidney disease, and therefore does not also need a kidney transplant, is difficult. The severity and duration of pretransplant renal dysfunction, hepatitis c, diabetes, and other risk factors for kidney disease are associated with an increased risk of posttransplant end-stage renal disease. However, there are currently no clinical findings that accurately predict renal recovery post liver transplant. As a result, the rate of SLK versus LTA differs significantly between transplant centers. To increase consistency across centers, multiple guidelines have been proposed to guide the decision between SLK and LTA, but their poor predictive value has limited their uniform adoption. Nevertheless, adoption of uniform rules for the allocation of kidneys would reduce the variability between centers in rates of SLK transplant.

Simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation for liver transplant recipients with diabetes and uremia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has become a critical problem due to immunosuppressant related nephrotoxicity in liver transplant (LTx) recipients, especially in patients with pre-transplant risk factors. LTx recipients with uraemia and diabetes have poor prognosis even when treated with dialysis and insulin. Simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPK) has been proven to be an effective treatment for patients with diabetic uraemia, but rarely performed in patients after LTx. Two cases of SPK after LTx were performed in our centre and we present our experience here.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two patients received LTx because of HBV related liver cirrhosis; both of them had pre-transplant diabetes mellitus (DM), which worsened after the administration of immunosuppressive drugs. These two patients suffered from CKD and developed uraemia due to diabetic nephropathy and immunosuppressive drugs induced renal toxicity years after LTx. They relied on dialysis and insulin injection. SPK were performed years after LTx and the clinical data was retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

SPK was successfully performed in these two patients. Pancreatic fluid drainage was achieved via a side-to-side duodenojejunostomy into the proximal jejunum. No serious surgical complications, including pancreatitis or pancreatic fistula were observed postoperatively. In both cases, kidney and pancreatic grafts were functioning well as evidenced by euglycemia without the need for insulin injections and normal serum-creatinine level 7days after the operation. One of the patients presented with renal graft impairment 1week after the operation. FK506 was tapered and rapamycin was used when the renal graft biopsy indicated drug toxicity. The patient's kidney graft function recovered gradually after the adjustment. Both patients have good function of liver, kidney and pancreas grafts during a 60-month and 30-month period of follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

SPK could serve as an effective option for patients with diabetes and uremia after LTx. Perioperative management, especially the immunosuppressive strategy is crucial to improve the outcome of this procedure.

Belatacept-based immunosuppression in de novo liver transplant recipients: 1-year experience from a phase II randomized study

This exploratory phase II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of belatacept in de novo adult liver transplant recipients. Patients were randomized (N = 260) to one of the following immunosuppressive regimens: (i) basiliximab + belatacept high dose [HD] + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), (ii) belatacept HD + MMF, (iii) belatacept low dose [LD] + MMF, (iv) tacrolimus + MMF, or (v) tacrolimus alone. All received corticosteroids. Demographic characteristics were similar among groups. The proportion of patients who met the primary end point (composite of acute rejection, graft loss, death by month 6) was higher in the belatacept groups (42–48%) versus tacrolimus groups (15–38%), with the highest number of deaths and grafts losses in the belatacept LD group. By month 12, the proportion surviving with a functioning graft was higher with tacrolimus + MMF (93%) and lower with belatacept LD (67%) versus other groups (90%: basiliximab + belatacept HD; 83%: belatacept HD; 88%: tacrolimus). Mean calculated GFR was 15–34 mL/min higher in belatacept-treated patients at 1 year. Two cases of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease and one case of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy occurred in belatacept-treated patients. Follow-up beyond month 12 revealed an increase in death and graft loss in another belatacept group (belatacept HD), after which the study was terminated.

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.

Renal interactions in liver dysfunction and failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will summarize the recent advances in our understanding of the relationship between liver and kidney function. It will outline the new concepts of the pathophysiology of renal dysfunction in chronic liver disease and examine novel renal biomarkers to detect acute kidney injury (AKI) in cirrhosis and following liver transplantation. We will further review new treatments for hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and approaches to kidney dysfunction in liver transplantation recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies evaluated the effect of the renin-angiotensin system on hepatic fibrosis and the role of the gut in mediating AKI after hepatic ischemia reperfusion injury. Multiple studies have investigated novel biomarkers such as neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin to predict AKI (and HRS) in cirrhosis and after liver transplantation. Furthermore, there were recent advances in the management of kidney dysfunction including management of HRS with vasopressin analogs and kidney-sparing immunosuppression after liver transplantation.

SUMMARY

Greater knowledge of the physiologic relationship between kidney and liver may open avenues for specific therapies of liver and kidney injury. Renal biomarkers may allow early diagnosis and targeted treatment of AKI, and improved management of kidney disease in the preliver and postliver transplantation setting will be crucial to improving long-term outcomes in these patients.

Predicting end-stage renal disease after liver transplant

Few equations have been developed to predict end-stage renal disease (ESRD) after deceased donor liver transplant. This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed all adult deceased donor liver transplant recipients in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database, 1995-2010. The prediction equation for ESRD was developed using candidate predictor variables available in SRTR after implementation of the allocation policy based on the model for end-stage liver disease. ESRD was defined as initiation of maintenance dialysis therapy, kidney transplant or registration on the kidney transplant waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazard models to develop separate equations for assessing risk of ESRD by 6 months posttransplant and between 6 months and 5 years posttransplant. Variables in the 6-month equation included recipient age, history of diabetes, history of dialysis before liver transplant, history of malignancy, body mass index, serum creatinine and liver donor risk index. Variables in the 6-month to 5-year equation included recipient race, history of diabetes, hepatitis C status, serum albumin, serum bilirubin and serum creatinine. The prediction equations have good calibration and discrimination (C statistics 0.74-0.78). We have produced risk prediction equations that can be used to aid in understanding the risk of ESRD after liver transplant.

Proteinuria following sirolimus conversion is associated with deterioration of kidney function in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The role of sirolimus (SRL) conversion in the preservation of kidney function in liver transplant (LT) recipients with calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) nephrotoxicity is unclear.

METHODS

Data on 102 LT recipients with deteriorating kidney function after CNI exposure who were later converted to SRL were retrospectively reviewed. Kidney function was assessed using serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at time of conversion and serially thereafter. The primary endpoint was stabilization or improvement of kidney function as assessed by eGFR at last recorded follow-up compared with eGFR at the time of conversion.

RESULT

After a median (interquartile range) of 3.1 (1.6-4.5) years of follow-up, serum creatinine decreased from 1.9 ± 0.8 to 1.8 ± 0.7 mg/dL (P=0.25) and eGFR increased from 40.8 ± 16.7 to 44.3 ± 20.0 mL/min (P=0.03). During the same time period, 24-hr urinary protein excretion increased from median (interquartile range) of 72 (0-155) to 382 (169-999) mg/day (P=0.0001). Sixty-five (64%) patients achieved the primary endpoint and 37 (36%) experienced deterioration in kidney function. Independent predictors of deterioration of kidney function after SRL conversion were development of proteinuria ≥ 1000 mg/day (odds ratio [OR]: 3.3, confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-9.5 P=0.03), post-LT diabetes (OR: 4.2, CI: 1.6-11.1, P=0.004), and higher eGFR at time of conversion (OR: 1.6, CI: 1.2-2.2, P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Improvement or stabilization of kidney function occurred in the majority of LT recipients converted to SRL for CNI nephrotoxicity. Proteinuria ≥ 1000 mg/day, post-LT diabetes, and higher baseline eGFR were independent predictors of kidney function loss after SRL conversion.

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.