Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients Older Than Age 70 Years: A Single-Center Experience

Future of U.S. living donor liver transplant: Donor and recipient criteria, transplant indications, transplant oncology, liver paired exchange, and non-directed donor graft allocation

In the United States, living donor liver transplant (LDLT), from both directed and nondirected living donors, has expanded over the past several years. LDLT is viewed as an important opportunity to expand the overall donor pool for liver transplantation (LT), shorten waiting times for a life-prolonging LT surgery, and reduce LT waitlist mortality. The LT community's focus on LDLT expansion in the United States is fostering discussions around future opportunities, which include the safe expansion of donor and recipient candidate eligibility criteria, broadening indications for LDLT including applications in transplant oncology, developing national initiatives around liver paired exchange, and maintaining vigilance to living donor and recipient candidate risk/benefit equipoise. Potential opportunities for expanding living liver donor and recipient candidate criteria include using donors with more than minimal hepatic steatosis, evaluating older donors, performing LDLT in older recipients to facilitate timely transplantation, and providing candidates who would benefit from an LT, but may otherwise have limited access (ie, lower MELD scores), an avenue to receive a life-prolonging organ. Expansion opportunities for LDLT are particularly robust in the transplant oncology realm, including leveraging LDLT for patients with advanced HCC beyond Milan, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and nonresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. With ongoing investment in the deliberate growth of LDLT surgical expertise, experience, and technical advances in the United States, the LT community's future vision to increase transplant access to more patients with end-stage liver disease and selected oncology patients may be successfully realized.

What is the crux of successful living-donor liver transplantation for recipients aged 70 and beyond?

Aim

There is limited evidence regarding the feasibility of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients aged over 70. The aims of this study were to assess postoperative outcomes in elderly recipients and to ascertain the potential feasibility and acceptability of LDLT.

Methods

Data were collected from 762 recipients, including 26 in the elderly group (aged ≥70) and 736 in the younger group (aged <70), and reviewed even by propensity score matching (PSM).

Results

No significant differences were observed in the frequency of postoperative complications between the two groups. Additionally, both groups exhibited a comparable 30-day mortality rate after LDLT (3.9% in both) and similar hospital stays (36 days vs. 40 days). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rates in the elderly group were 92.0%, which was comparable to those in the younger group (p = 0.517), as confirmed by PSM. Notably, all donors for elderly patients were the children of the recipients, with an average age of 41.6 years, and grafts from donors aged ≥50 years were not utilized, signifying the use of high-quality grafts. Our inclusion criterion for elderly recipients was strictly defined as an ECOG-PS score of 0-2, which played a pivotal role in achieving favorable postoperative outcomes.

Conclusion

LDLT can be performed safely for elderly patients aged 70 years or older, provided they have a preserved PS and receive high-quality grafts from younger donors, inevitably all children of elderly recipients. This approach yields acceptable long-term outcomes. Consequently, age alone should not serve as an absolute contraindication for LDLT.

Feasible living donor liver transplantation for patients on chronic hemodialysis: a multicenter study in East Asian countries

PURPOSES

End-stage liver and kidney disease is an indication for simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation. However, in countries where deceased donor transplantation is not well established, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a realistic option for patients on hemodialysis (HD). We investigated the outcomes of LDLT for patients on HD.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter survey of patients on chronic HD who underwent LDLT in East Asian countries. The characteristics of donors and recipients and the short and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 2001 and 2021, 45 patients on HD underwent LDLT and 11 of these patients also underwent kidney transplantation (KT). The overall survival rate at 5 years of the 34 patients who underwent only LDLT was 44.5%. Multivariate analysis identified a low graft recipient weight ratio (< 1%) (p = 0.048) and long HD duration (≥ 10 years) (p = 0.046) as independent predictors of poor overall survival. The major complication was posttransplant bleeding, which occurred in12 patients (35%).

CONCLUSION

It is important to establish the indications for LDLT, taking into consideration graft size and HD duration in candidate patients on HD.

Outcomes of 6000 living donor liver transplantation procedures: a pioneering experience at ASAN Medical Center

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has emerged as a favorable alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation, significantly reducing waitlist mortality, particularly in Asian countries with very low deceased organ donation rates. Asan Medical Center (AMC) in South Korea has pioneered innovative LDLT surgical techniques and become established as an extremely high-volume center for LDLT. This retrospective study analyzed 6000 consecutive LDLT procedures, including 510 dual-graft procedures, performed at AMC between December 1994 and January 2021. Of these, 312 LDLT procedures were performed in children aged < 18 years. In adult recipients, liver cirrhosis (LC) related to viral hepatitis was the most common indication, occurring in 69.8% of cases. Biliary atresia (46.8%) was the most common indication for pediatric LDLT. This study demonstrated outstanding long-term outcomes, with patient survival rates at 1, 5, 10, and 20 years of 92.7%, 85.9%, 82.1%, and 70.9%, respectively, in LDLT group for adults aged 50 and under at the time of LDLT, and 92.9%, 89.0%, 88.1%, and 81.9%, respectively, in the pediatric group. The in-hospital mortality rate of adult recipients was 3.8% (n = 214/5688). This study demonstrates the importance of refined surgical techniques, selection of grafts tailored to the recipient, and comprehensive multidisciplinary perioperative patient care in expanding the scope of LDLT and improving recipient outcomes.

Early Graft Failure After Living-Donor Liver Transplant

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been increasing in the USA. While data exist on longer-term patient and graft outcomes, a contemporary analysis of short-term outcomes is needed.

AIM

Evaluate short-term (30-day) graft failure rates and identify predictors associated with these outcomes.

METHODS

Adult (≥ 18) LDLT recipients from 01/2004 to 12/2021 were analyzed from the United States Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Graft status at 30 days was assessed with graft failure defined as retransplantation or death. Comparison of continuous and categorical variables was performed and a multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of early graft failure.

RESULTS

During the study period, 4544 LDLTs were performed with a graft failure rate of 3.4% (155) at 30 days. Grafts from male donors (aOR: 0.63, CI 0.44-0.89), right lobe grafts (aOR: 0.40, CI 0.27-0.61), recipients aged > 60 years (aOR: 0.52, CI 0.32-0.86), and higher recipient albumin (aOR: 0.73, CI 0.57-0.93) were associated with superior early graft outcomes, whereas Asian recipient race (vs. White; aOR: 3.75, CI 1.98-7.10) and a history of recipient PVT (aOR: 2.7, CI 1.52-4.78) were associated with inferior outcomes. LDLTs performed during the most recent 2016-2021 period (compared to 2004-2009 and 2010-2015) resulted in significantly superior outcomes (aOR: 0.45, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that while short-term adult LDLT graft failure is uncommon, there are opportunities for optimizing outcomes by prioritizing right lobe donation, improving candidate nutritional status, and careful pre-transplant risk assessment of candidates with known PVT. Notably, a period effect exists whereby increased LDLT experience in the most recent era correlated with improved outcomes.

Achieving 400 Living Donor Liver Transplantations Annually During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on liver transplantation (LT) and living donor programs globally.

PURPOSE

In this study, we aimed to present the principles and strategies of our LT program during the pandemic period and describe its achievements.

BASIC PROCEDURES

We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 1417 LTs performed at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, from 2020 to 2022. Of these, 216 recipients who received transplants from deceased donors were excluded, and 1201 recipients who received transplants from 1268 live donors were included in the study, including 38 children <18 years old.

MAIN FINDINGS

Among the 1201 living donor LT (LDLT) recipients, the most common indication for LT was unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (315/1163, 27.1%) in adults and biliary atresia (29/38, 76.3%) in pediatric recipients. Emergency LDLT was performed in 40 patients (3.3%). The median model of end-stage liver disease and pediatric end-stage liver disease scores were 13.9 ± 7.2 and 13.8 ± 7.1, respectively. In-hospital mortality of recipients was higher than usual at 2.2%, but the cause of death was not related to COVID-19 infection. Of the 1268 live donors who underwent hepatectomy for liver donation, 660 (52.1%) underwent hepatectomy using a minimally invasive approach. Although 17 (1.3%) live donors experienced major complications, there were no serious life-threatening complications and no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Even in a pandemic era, a team with well-established infection control protocols, patient-tailored surgical strategies, and thorough perioperative care can maintain LDLT at a similar quantitative and qualitative level as in a non-pandemic era.

Immunosuppression for older liver transplant recipients

Older liver transplant recipients have a lower risk of acute rejection than younger patients (9% for patients aged ≥65 years versus 23% for those aged 18-34 years) and are more vulnerable to immunosuppression-related complications. The number of liver transplant recipients ≥65 years has risen to 22% in Europe and the US, but limited information is available on the optimal immunosuppressive regimen for these patients. In this review, we discuss the appropriate management of immunosuppressive agents in older adults to minimize adverse events while avoiding acute rejection. The way the body processes drugs greatly depends on age. In the case of calcineurin inhibitor drugs, aging reduces hepatic metabolism, leading to changes in their pharmacokinetics. Corticosteroids also show decreased clearance as the patient ages. In severe cases of hypoalbuminemia, dose adjustment of mycophenolate acid derivatives may be necessary. However, the pharmacokinetic profiles of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, basiliximab, and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin remain unaffected by age. Furthermore, age-related frailty may impact drug metabolism and require tailored interventions and closer follow-up. Although there is limited research, elderly liver transplant recipients require less immunosuppression with double or triple-agent regimens, lower exposure to calcineurin inhibitors, and a shorter course of corticosteroids. The usage of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in older transplant populations has not been specifically investigated, and thus their usage should align with indications for younger patient groups.

Survival after LDLT in recipients ≥70 years old in the United States. An OPTN/UNOS liver transplant registry analysis

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in the elderly population is currently not well studied. There are single-center studies indicating that patient age should not be a barrier to LDLT, with similar outcomes compared to younger recipients.

METHODS

Using UNOS/STAR data from 2010 to 2022 we retrospectively analyzed patients ≥70 years old receiving a living donor graft (LDLT ≥70y group) versus a deceased donor graft (DDLT ≥70y group). In addition, we compared recipients ≥70 years old undergoing LDLT versus patients 18-69 years old also undergoing LDLT. Donor and recipient baseline characteristics, as well as postoperative outcomes including graft and patient survival were analyzed and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Recipients in the LDLT ≥70y group showed less disease burden and spent significantly less time on the waitlist when compared to recipients in the DDLT ≥70y group (102 [49-201] days versus 170 [36-336] days) respectively; p = .004. With the exception of a longer length of stay (LOS) in the LDLT ≥70y group (p ≤ .001), postoperative outcomes were comparable with recipients in the DDLT ≥70y group, including similar graft and patient survival rates at 1-, 3-, and 5-years. When compared to younger recipients of a graft from a living donor, patients in the LDLT ≥70y group had similar post-transplant functional status, re-transplant rates and similar causes contributing to graft failure. However, significantly lower graft and patient survival rates were observed.

CONCLUSION

LDLT for recipients aged 70 or greater represents a faster access to transplantation in a safe and feasible manner when compared to similar- aged recipients undergoing DDLT.

Liver Transplantation: Contraindication and Ineligibility

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving therapeutic modality for patients with various advanced liver diseases. It is crucial to identify that the patient's illness is sufficiently advanced and unlikely to improve with medical management to justify the need for transplantation. At the same time, it is crucial to identify patients with comorbidities and far advanced disease that would result in an unacceptable outcome after LT. Specific care also is required before deciding on LT in the elderly, acute on chronic liver disease, patients with comorbidities, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Transplantation needs to be timed appropriately to avoid unnecessary LT and ensure that the decision is not left too late to avoid losing the patient without a transplant. Also, important is the decision as to when not to transplant. The current review explores some of these issues of contraindications and ineligibility for LT.

Liver transplantation for elderly patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Although liver resection is a viable option for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver transplantation is the optimal treatment. The aim of this study was to identify characteristics of liver transplantation for elderly patients, and to assess the therapeutic benefit derived from liver transplantation over liver resection.

METHODS

This was a population-based study of patients undergoing liver transplantation for HCC in the USA between 2004 and 2018. Data were retrieved from the National Cancer Database. Elderly patients were defined as individuals aged 70 years and over. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to control for heterogeneity between the liver resection and liver transplantation cohorts.

RESULTS

Among 4909 liver transplant recipients, 215 patients (4.1 per cent) were classified as elderly. Among 5922 patients who underwent liver resection, 1907 (32.2 per cent) were elderly. Elderly patients who underwent liver transplantation did not have a higher hazard of dying during the first 5 years after transplantation than non-elderly recipients. After propensity score weighting, liver transplantation was associated with a lower risk of death than liver resection. Other factors associated with overall survival included diagnosis during 2016-2018, non-white/non-African American race, and α-fetoprotein level over 20 ng/dl.

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients with HCC should not be excluded from liver transplantation based on age only. Transplantation leads to favourable survival compared with liver resection.

Outcomes of liver transplantation in patients 70 years or older: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The rate of liver transplantation is increasing among the elderly population; however, data is limited on the post-liver transplantation outcomes in patients ≥70 years. Given the scarcity in liver allograft resources, a meta-analysis on the outcomes of liver transplantation in patients ≥70 years is warranted.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multiple databases were searched through March 2022 for studies that reported on the outcomes of liver-transplantation in patients ≥70 years. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistics.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included that analyzed 162,725 patients. The pooled rate of 1-year, 3-years and 5-years post liver transplant survival for patients ≥70 years was 78.7% (72.6-83.7; I²=74%), 61.2% (52.3-69.5; I²=87%), and 48.9% (39.3-58.6; I²=96%), respectively. The corresponding 1-year, 3-years and 5-years survival for patients <70 years were 86.6% (82.4-89.9; I²=99%), 73.2% (63-81.3; I²=99%), and 70.1% (66.8-73.2; I²=99%); respectively. Descriptive p-values of comparison were statistically significant at 1-year and 5-years (p = 0.02 and <0.001). The pooled rate of perioperative complications in patients ≥70 years was 40.7% (26.2-57; I²=93%). The pooled rate of graft failure in patients ≥70 years was 6.7% (3.3-13.1; I²=93%) and in patients <70 years was 3.7% (1-12.4; I²=99%). The pooled rate of perioperative mortality in patients ≥70 years was 16.6% (7.6-32.5; I²=99%) and in patients <70 years was 0.8% (0-33.1; I²=88%).

CONCLUSION

Patients ≥70 years undergoing liver transplantation seem to demonstrate significantly lower 1-year and 5-year survival rates as compared to patients <70 years, albeit limited by heterogeneity.

Domino liver transplants: where do we stand after a quarter-century? A US national analysis

BACKGROUND

Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes a phenotypically normal explant from select recipients as a donor graft in another patient. The procedure is not widely employed and remains restricted to a small number of centers. The purpose of this study was to assess the national profile of DLT in the United States (US) and evaluate current survival outcomes.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was queried for all liver transplants (LT) between 1996 and 2020. Outcomes of interest were long-term graft and patient survival.

RESULTS

Of 181,976 LTs performed nationally during the study period, 185 (0.1%) were DLTs. Amyloidosis and maple syrup urine disease (MSUD) accounted for 83% of dominoed allografts. Out of 210 explants with amyloidosis, 103 (49%) were dominoed into secondary recipients. Only 50 (22%) of all MSUD explants (n = 227) were dominoed. Graft survival was 79%, 73% and 53% at 3-, 5- and 10-years, respectively, for DLT recipients. Overall patient survival was 83%, 76% and 57% at 3-, 5- and 10-years.

CONCLUSION

Despite excellent long-term survival outcomes, DLT allografts comprise a very small percentage of the liver donor pool. A large proportion of potential DLTs may be unconscionably excluded despite shortages in deceased donor organs.

BETTER LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANTATION PATIENT SURVIVAL COMPARED TO DECEASED DONOR — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT Background Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is the first choice, but living donor transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to be considered in special situations, such as lack of donated organs and emergencies. So far, there is no consensus on which transplantation method provides better survival and fewer complications, which is still an open point for discussion. Methods This meta-analysis compared the 1, 3, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates of LDLT and DDLT. We included studies published from April-2009 to June-2021 and adopted the generic model of the inverse of variance for the random effect of hazard ratios. The adequacy of the studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale — NOS (WELLS). Results For patient survival analysis, we included a total of 32,258 subjects. We found a statistically significant better survival for the LDLT group at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively: 1.35 HR (95%CI 1.10—1.66, P=0.005), 1.26 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.46, P=0.002) and 1.27 HR (95%CI 1.09—1.48, P=0.002). Our meta-analysis evaluated a total of 21,276 grafts. In the overall analysis, the 1-year survival was improved in favor of the LDLT group (1.36 HR, 95%CI 1.16—1.60, P<0.0001), while the 3-year survival (1.13 HR, 95%CI 0.96—1.33, P<0.13), and 5 (0.99 HR, 95%CI 0.74—1.33, P<0.96), did not differ significantly. Conclusion This metanalysis detected a statistically significant greater 1-, 3- and 5-years patient survival favoring LDLT compared to DDLT as well as a statistically significant difference better 1-year graft survival favoring the LDLT group.

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Posttransplant Outcomes in Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Older Adult Recipients

The impact of increasing recipient age on morbidity and mortality following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains controversial. The study aims to analyze the impact of recipient age on outcomes following LDLT. Data on adult LDLTs performed between November 2009 and February 2020 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on recipient age: 18 to 65 years (younger adults) and >65 years (older adults). Propensity score matching (PSM) using nearest-neighbor matching was used to match each older recipient with up to 2 younger adult recipients using multiple preoperative parameters. Outcomes evaluated were duration of ventilation, need for reintubation, tracheostomy, intensive care unit (ICU) readmission, length of ICU and hospital stays, postoperative complications, reoperation within 90 days, and patient survival. A total of 801 adult LDLT recipients were included in the study; 751 (93.7%) were younger adults, and 50 (6.3%) were older adults. Older recipients were more likely to be diabetic (60.0% versus 39.7%) and hypertensive (44.0% versus 20.4%) with preexisting cardiac disease (28.0% versus 11.2%). However, their pretransplant Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was significantly lower (14.5 versus 17.7), and they were more likely to receive a transplant because of hepatocellular carcinoma (38.0% versus 17.7%). Older recipients had longer durations of ventilation after LT both before (3.7 versus 1.9 days) and after PSM (4.0 versus 1.5 days). After PSM, the 30-day (13.0% versus 2.4%), 90-day (15.2% and 2.4%), and overall mortality rates (21.7% versus 7.1%) were significantly higher for older recipients when compared with younger recipients. There was no difference between the younger and older recipients with respect to other postoperative outcomes. This propensity score-matched study shows that the older LDLT recipients have higher 30-day, 90-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality rates when compared with matched younger counterparts.

Hepatobiliary Cancers, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), gallbladder cancer, and cancer of the bile ducts (intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma). Due to the multiple modalities that can be used to treat the disease and the complications that can arise from comorbid liver dysfunction, a multidisciplinary evaluation is essential for determining an optimal treatment strategy. A multidisciplinary team should include hepatologists, diagnostic radiologists, interventional radiologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists with hepatobiliary cancer expertise. In addition to surgery, transplant, and intra-arterial therapies, there have been great advances in the systemic treatment of HCC. Until recently, sorafenib was the only systemic therapy option for patients with advanced HCC. In 2020, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab became the first regimen to show superior survival to sorafenib, gaining it FDA approval as a new frontline standard regimen for unresectable or metastatic HCC. This article discusses the NCCN Guidelines recommendations for HCC.

Living donor liver transplantation in septuagenarians: Better late than never

BACKGROUND

The coupling of increased life expectancy and improvements in both quality and access to chronic liver disease care, is culminating in an expanding population of septuagenarians (≥70 years) in need of liver transplantation (LT). The objective of this study is to partially alleviate this knowledge deficit and to add clarity to the current status and role of LDLT in this recipient population.

METHODS

Of 295 adult patients underwent LDLT between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016. Twelve (4%) of these patients were septuagenarians and this group was compared to younger cohort (n = 283).

RESULTS

Comorbidity profiles between the two groups were similar and no statistically significant differences were noted in warm/cold ischemia times, operative duration, or blood product utilization. ICU and total hospital stays were comparable. Septuagenarian 1-and 5-year graft and patient survivals were identical at 91.7%. Their younger counterparts had 1-and 5-year patient survivals of 91.1% and 84.0 % accompanied by 1-and 5-year graft survivals of 89.8% and 82.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights a recognition that LDLT can afford highly-selected elderly patients to access to transplant with equivalent outcomes to those realized by younger recipients.

Transplant of Elderly Patients: Is There an Upper Age Cutoff?

Increased life expectancy and advances in the care of chronic liver disease has increased the number of elderly patients needing liver transplant. Organ donation policies prioritize transplant to the sickest. There is an ongoing debate with regard to balancing the principles of equity and utility. Several hospitals have adopted center-specific policies and there has been an increased trend of transplant in elderly patients since 2002. Appropriate patient selection and long-term outcomes in the setting of limited organ availability pose several challenges. This article reviews the data and discusses the pros and cons of transplants in the elderly.

Liver transplantation in elderly patients: what do we know at the beginning of 2020?

An aging population has prompted us to evaluate the indications of liver transplantation (LT) in elderly patients more frequently. In this review, we summarize the short- and long-term results after LT in elderly patients and also discuss the criteria used to select patients and how recipient age can challenge current allocation systems. Briefly, the feasibility and early outcomes of LT in elderly patients compare favorably with those of younger patients. Although long-term survival is less than satisfactory, large-scale studies show that the transplant survival benefit is similar for elderly and younger patients. Therefore, age alone does not contraindicate LT; however, screening for cardiopulmonary comorbidities, and asymptomatic malignancies, evaluating nutritional status, and frailty, is crucial to ensure optimal results and avoid futile transplantation.

Generic Tacrolimus (Tacrobell®) Shows Comparable Outcomes to Brand-Name Tacrolimus in the Long-Term Period After Adult Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation

Background

Generic tacrolimus (Tacrobell^®) is commonly used in liver transplant patients in Korea. No previous studies have assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of generic tacrolimus for adult deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) patients. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of generic tacrolimus compared to brand-name tacrolimus (Prograf^®) in adult DDLT recipients.

Methods

Two hundred sixty-five adult DDLTs were performed in our center between 2003 and 2017. To determine the efficacy and safety of generic tacrolimus, renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] and creatinine), infectious complications, rejection-free survival rates, and patient survival rates were investigated.

Results

Of 265 patients, 193 were selected and divided into a generic tacrolimus group (n=147) and a brand-name group (n=46). Mean follow-up duration was 63.2 ± 44.3 months. The 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year patient survival rates were 89.1%, 86.9%, 84.5%, and 75.2%, respectively, in the generic tacrolimus group and 95.7%, 88.9%, 86.3%, and 83.7% in the brand-name tacrolimus group. There were no statistically significant differences in the infectious complications, new-onset diabetes, and renal dysfunction included mean serum creatinine level or eGFR after DDLT between the two groups. Increased recipient age, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in the pre-transplant phase, and acute rejection were predisposing factors for patient death.

Conclusion

The present study shows that generic tacrolimus is an alternative comparable to brand-name tacrolimus in adult DDLT patients.

Comorbidity Index as a Selection Tool for Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Elderly Patients

BACKGROUND

Previously published data have shown that age alone is not a contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, careful evaluation is needed to identify the patients who are unlikely to benefit from LDLT. We hypothesized that the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) could be used as one of the criteria for risk stratification in elderly patients undergoing LDLT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

There were 951 patients who underwent LDLT between October 2004 and February 2018. All recipients who were older than 60 years of age at the time of transplantation were identified. The comorbidity score was retrospectively assessed for each elderly patient according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictive factors for survival in elderly patients after LDLT.

RESULTS

There were 96 patients (10.1%) in the age of > 60 years. All patients received the right lobe of their donor. Out of these patients, 18 (18.7%) died in the median time of 4 months. The remaining 78 patients (81.2%) are alive, with a median survival of 33 months. The CCI of these patients was significantly lower compared to the other 18 patients (2 versus 4). None of the patients with a CCI above 4 survived longer than 12 months. The results of the multivariate Cox regression analyses have shown that pulmonary disease, renal disease, and CCI are independent negative predictive factors for survival.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study show clearly that the CCI has a significant influence on survival after LDLT in elderly patients and can be used as one of the selection criteria for LDLT in elderly patients.

Recipient Age and Mortality After Liver Transplantation: A Population-based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of liver transplantation (LT) in elderly recipients remains a topic of debate.

METHODS

This cohort study evaluated the impact of recipient's age on LT outcome between January 2007 and May 2016 covered by the Korean National Health Insurance system (n = 9415). Multilevel regression models were used to determine the impact of recipient's age on in-hospital and long-term mortality after LT.

RESULTS

All patients had a first LT, with 2473 transplanted with liver from deceased donors (DD) and 6942 from living donors. The mean age was 52.2 ± 9.0 years. Most LT were performed on patients in their 50s (n = 4290, 45.6%) and 0.9% (n = 84) of the LT was performed on patients older 70 years. The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.3%, and the 3-year mortality was 11.3%. The in-hospital mortality included, 13.5% associated with DDLT and 3.7% involved living donor LT. When compared with that for patients aged 51 to 55 years, the risk of death among recipients older than 70 years was about fourfold higher after adjusting for baseline liver disease (odds ratio, 4.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.21-7.58), and was nearly threefold higher after adjusting for baseline liver disease and perioperative complications (odds ratio, 2.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-6.24). Also, the cost of LT increased significantly with age.

CONCLUSIONS

The data show that age remains an important risk factor for LT, suggesting that LT should be considered with caution in elderly recipients.