Incorporation of donor risk into liver allocation algorithms

What did the European Liver Transplant Registry bring to liver transplantation?

Since its foundation in 1985, the European Liver Transplant Registry has evolved to become an important tool to monitor the liver transplantation activity in Europe. The vast amount of data collected on 169 473 liver transplantations performed in 153 238 recipients has also resulted in scientific publications. Without doubt, several of these have influenced the daily practice of liver transplantation. This paper gives an overview of the development, the functioning, and the scientific activity of the European Liver Transplant Registry during more than three decades. Indeed, it can be said that the registry helped to advance the practice of liver transplantation not only in Europe but also worldwide.

Combined effect of donor and recipient risk on outcome after liver transplantation: Research of the Eurotransplant database

Recently the Eurotransplant donor risk index (ET-DRI) was published, a model based on data from the Eurotransplant database that can be used for risk indication of liver donors within the Eurotransplant region. Because outcome after liver transplantation (LT) depends both on donor and recipient risk factors, a combined donor-recipient model (DRM) would give a more complete picture of the overall risk involved. All liver transplants in adult recipients from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2010 in the Eurotransplant region were included. Risk factors in donors and recipients for failure-free (retransplant free) survival were analyzed in univariate and multivariate analyses. A simplified recipient risk index (sRRI) was constructed using all available recipient factors. A total of 4466 liver transplants were analyzed. Median donor risk index and ET-DRI were 1.78 and 1.91, respectively. The ET-DRI was validated in this new cohort (P < 0.001; concordance index [c-index], 0.59). After construction of a simplified recipient risk index of significant recipient factors, Cox regression analysis showed that the combination ET-DRI and sRRI into a new DRM gave the highest predictive value (P < 0.001; c-index, 0.62). The combined model of ET-DRI and sRRI gave a significant prediction of outcome after orthotopic LT in the Eurotransplant region, better than the ET-DRI alone. This DRM has potential in comparing data in the literature and correcting for sickness/physical condition of transplant recipients. It is a first step toward benchmarking of graft survival in the Eurotransplant region.

Excessive immunosuppression as a potential cause of poor survival in simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation for hepatitis C

Appropriate recipient selection of simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation (SLKT) remains controversial. In particular, data on liver graft survival in hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) SLKT recipients are lacking. We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of HCV+ SLKT recipients (N = 25) in comparison with HCV- SLKT (N = 26) and HCV+ liver transplantation alone (LTA, N = 296). Despite backgrounds of HCV+ and HCV- SLKT being similar, HCV+ SLKT demonstrated significantly impaired 5-year liver graft survival of 35% (HCV- SLKT, 79%, P = 0.004). Compared with HCV+ LTA, induction immunosuppression was more frequently used in HCV+ SLKT. Five-year liver graft survival rate for HCV+ SLKT was significantly lower than that for LTA (35% vs. 74%, respectively, P < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratio of liver graft loss in HCV+ SLKT was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 2.0-12.1, P = 0.001). HCV+ SLKT recipients were more likely to succumb to recurrent HCV and sepsis compared with LTA (32% vs. 8.8%, P < 0.001 and 24% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.030, respectively). Ten HCV+ SLKT recipients underwent anti-HCV therapy for recurrent HCV; only 1 achieved sustained virological response. HCV+ SLKT is associated with significantly decreased long-term prognosis compared with HCV- SLKT and HCV+ LTA.