Can we stop waiting for godot? Establishing selection criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation

Delayed Graft Function in Simultaneous Liver Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Delayed graft function (DGF) is associated with inferior posttransplant outcomes in kidney transplantation. Given these adverse outcomes, we sought to determine the incidence, unique risk factors, and posttransplant outcomes for simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) transplant recipients developing DGF.

METHODS

We studied 6214 adult SLK recipients from March 2002 to February 2017 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. We determined associations between risk factors and DGF using Poisson multivariate regression and between DGF and graft failure and mortality using Cox proportional hazard analysis.

RESULTS

The overall rate of DGF was 21.8%. Risk factors for DGF in the hepatitis C virus (HCV)-negative recipient population included pretransplant dialysis (adjusted incident rate ratio [aIRR] 3.26, P = 0.004), donor body mass index (aIRR 1.25 per 5 kg/m, P = 0.01), and transplantation with a donation after circulatory death (aIRR 5.38, P = 0.001) or imported donor organ (regional share aIRR 1.69, P = 0.03; national share aIRR 4.82, P < 0.001). DGF was associated with a 2.6-fold increase in kidney graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.63, P < 0.001), 1.6-fold increase in liver graft failure (aHR 1.62, P < 0.001), and 1.6-fold increase in mortality (aHR 1.62, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In HCV-negative SLK recipients, recipient pretransplant dialysis and components of kidney graft quality comprise significant risk factors for DGF. Regardless of HCV status, DGF is associated with inferior posttransplant outcomes. Understanding these risk factors during clinical decision-making may improve prevention of DGF and may represent an opportunity to improve posttransplant outcomes.

Impact of Recipient Age in Combined Liver-Kidney Transplantation: Caution Is Needed for Patients ≥70 Years

Elderly recipients (≥70 y) account for 2.6% of all liver transplants (LTs) in the United States and have similar outcomes as younger recipients. Although the rate of elderly recipients in combined liver-kidney transplant (CLKT) is similar, limited data are available on how elderly recipients perform after CLKT.

METHODS

We have previously shown excellent outcomes in CLKT using delayed kidney transplant (Indiana) Approach (mean kidney cold ischemia time = 53 ± 14 h). Between 2007 and 2018, 98 CLKTs were performed using the Indiana Approach at Indiana University (IU) and the data were retrospectively analyzed. Recipients were subgrouped based on their age: 18-45 (n = 16), 46-59 (n = 34), 60-69 (n = 40), and ≥70 years (n = 8).

RESULTS

Overall, more elderly patients received LT at IU (5.2%) when compared nationally (2.6%). The rate of elderly recipients in CLKT at IU was 8.2% (versus 2% Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient). Recipient and donor characteristics were comparable between all age groups except recipient age and duration of dialysis. Patient survival at 1 and 3 years was similar among younger age groups, whereas patient survival was significantly lower in elderly recipients at 1 (60%) and 3 years (40%) (P = 0.0077). Control analyses (replicating Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient's survival stratification: 18-45, 46-64, ≥65 y) showed similar patient survival in all age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although LT can be safely performed in elderly recipients, extreme caution is needed in CLKT due to the magnitude of operation.

Excellent outcomes in combined liver-kidney transplantation: Impact of kidney donor profile index and delayed kidney transplantation

The positive impact of delayed kidney transplantation (KT) on patient survival for combined liver-kidney transplantation (CLKT) has already been demonstrated by our group. The purpose of this study is to identify whether the quality of the kidneys (based on kidney donor profile index [KDPI]) or the delayed approach KT contributes to improved patient survival. In total, 130 CLKTs were performed between 2002 and 2015, 69 with simultaneous KT (group S) and 61 with delayed KT (group D) (performed as a second operation with a mean cold ischemia time [CIT] of 50 ± 15 hours). All patients were categorized according to the KDPI score: 1%-33%, 34%-66%, and 67%-99%. Recipient and donor characteristics were comparable within groups S and D. Transplant outcomes were comparable within groups S and D, including liver and kidney CIT, warm ischemia time, and delayed graft function. Lower KDPI kidneys (<34%) were associated with increased patient survival in both groups. The combination of delayed KT and KDPI 1%-33% resulted in 100% patient survival at 3 years. These results support that delayed KT in CLKT improves patient survival. The combination of delayed KT and low KDPI offers excellent patient survival up to 3 years. Improved outcomes in the delayed KT group including high KDPI kidneys supports expansion of the donor pool with the use of more extended criteria donor and donation after circulatory death kidneys. Liver Transplantation 24 222-232 2018 AASLD.

MELD Stratified Outcomes Among Recipients With Diabetes or Hypertension: Simultaneous Liver Kidney Versus Liver Alone

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Data are scanty on allocating simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) based on model for end-stage disease (MELD) score. Diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypertension (HTN) are frequent in cirrhosis patients. We analyzed transplant recipients with DM and/or HTN to compare MELD-based outcomes of SLK to liver transplantation alone (LTA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of 13,584 first deceased donor liver transplantation among patients with DM and/or HTN (1530 or 11.2% SLK), MELD score predicted SLK [1.02 (1.01-1.03)]. SLK was beneficial for 5-year patient survival at MELD score ≥43 (78.6% vs. 62.6%, P=0.017), but not at MELD score <29 (74.8% vs. 76.2%, P=0.63). Among 11,405 recipients (976 SLK) at MELD score <29, SLK (n=816) was beneficial compared with 706 LTA [75% vs. 64%, P<0.001; 0.71 (0.55-0.91)] at serum creatinine (SC) ≥2 but not at SC<2 [73% vs. 76%, P=0.32; 0.85 (0.60-1.2)]. Among patients with MELD score 29 to 42, SLK (n=484) and LTA (n=1403) had similar survival [69% vs. 69%, P=0.58; 0.9 (0.7-1.5)]. Among patients with MELD score ≥43, SLK (n=70) was associated with 35% improved patient survival at 5 years compared with 222 LTA [0.65 (0.46-0.93)].

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with DM and/or HTN, SLK is useful at: (a) MELD score <29 and SC≥2 and (b) MELD score ≥43. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings as basis to optimize use of SLK.

Long-Term Outcomes of Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplant Patients with Hepatitis B Compared to with Liver Transplant Alone

BACKGROUND

The number and survival rate of simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (SLKT) recipients have increased dramatically since 2002. However, the long-term effectiveness of SLKT in patients with hepatitis B is unknown.

MATERIAL/METHODS

Forty-six patients who visited the Organ Transplant Center of the Shanghai First People's Hospital between January 2001 and May 2005 had hepatitis B virus infection and renal failure (any degree), and underwent organ transplantation: 21 patients underwent SLKT and 25 patients underwent liver transplant (LT) alone.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of SLKT recipients were 90.5%, 81.0%, and 81.0%, respectively. Incidence of acute hepatic allograft rejection between SLKT recipients and LT recipients (33% vs. 16%) did not reach significance (P=0.170). Despite higher infection rate, more prevalent hepatitis B relapse, and longer stay in the intensive care unit, SLKT recipients experienced significantly higher 1-year survival rate (90.5%) compared with LT recipients (60%, P=0.019). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that postoperative renal failure (odds ratio (OR)=48, P=0.003) and Risk/Injury/Failure/Loss/End-stage (RIFLE) stage (OR=8, P=0.012) were independent risk factors for postoperative death after LT.

CONCLUSIONS

SLKT in patients with hepatitis B had higher early-stage infection rate, but had a higher long-term survival rate compared with the LT group. Although the incidence of postoperative hepatitis B relapse in SLKT recipients was higher, timely and reasonable treatment can ensure long-term survival of patients. Worsening RIFLE stage of recipients can predict high mortality when only given LT. SLKT might be a better choice for RIFLE stage 2 or 3 patients than LT alone.

Outcomes of liver transplantation alone after listing for simultaneous kidney: comparison to simultaneous liver kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Data on patient and liver graft survival comparing liver transplantation alone after listing for kidney with simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) transplantation are scanty.

METHODS

United Network Organ Sharing network database (1994-2011) queried for liver transplantation alone after being listed for kidney and SLK transplants.

RESULTS

Of 65,206 first liver transplants, 3549 were listed for simultaneous kidney. Of these, 422 (12%) received only liver (LIST) and differed from SLK recipients for the white race (64% vs. 57%; 0.005), diabetes (27% vs. 37%; P = 0.02), model for end-stage liver disease era (68% vs. 82%; P = 0.0001), serum creatinine (2.9±1.9 vs. 4.3±2.5; P < 0.0001), dialysis (35% vs. 64%; P < 0.0001), and donor risk index (1.6±0.4 vs. 1.5±0.3; P < 0.0001). Overall survival was poorer in the LIST group (55% vs. 76%; P < 0.0001). A higher proportion of patients died within 2 days of transplantation in LIST group (11% vs. 0.5%; P < 0.0001), mostly from cardiovascular causes. After excluding these patients, odds of patient mortality and liver graft loss were about 1.2-fold and twofold higher in the LIST group. A total of 103 (24%) patients needed a renal transplantation in the LIST group with 16 (4%) receiving kidney within first year after transplantation. After excluding patients receiving kidney within first year, about 33% recovered renal function to above estimated GFR of greater than 60 mL per min.

CONCLUSION

Guidelines are needed for patient selection to list for and receipt of simultaneous liver kidney transplantation.

Renal outcomes of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation compared to liver transplant alone for candidates with renal dysfunction

It is unclear whether a concomitant kidney transplant grants survival benefit to liver transplant (LT) candidates with renal dysfunction (RD). We retrospectively studied LT candidates without RD (n = 714) and LT candidates with RD who underwent either liver transplant alone (RD-LTA; n = 103) or simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (RD-SLKT; n = 68). RD was defined as renal replacement therapy (RRT) requirement or modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD)-glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) . RD-LTAs had worse one-yr post-transplant survival compared to RD-SLKTs (79.6% vs. 91.2%, p = 0.05). However, RD-LTA recipients more often had hepatitis C (60.2% vs. 41.2%, p = 0.004) and more severe liver disease (MELD 37.9 ± 8.1 vs. 32.7 ± 9.1, p = 0.0001). Twenty RD-LTA recipients died in the first post-transplant year. Evaluation of the cause and timing of death relative to native renal recovery revealed that only four RD-LTA recipients might have derived survival benefit from RD-SLKT. Overall, 87% of RD-LTA patients recovered renal function within one month of transplant. One yr after RD-LTA or RD-SLKT, serum creatinine (1.5 ± 1.2 mg/dL vs. 1.4 ± 0.5 mg/dL, p = 0.63) and prevalence of stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD; 5.9% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.11) were comparable. Our series provides little evidence that RD-SLKT would have yielded substantial short-term survival benefit to RD-LTA recipients.