Association between donor age and risk of graft failure after liver transplantation: an analysis of the Eurotransplant database

Dynamic Preservation of Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Grafts From Donors Aged 60 y and Older

BACKGROUND

Donor livers from older donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors are frequently discarded for transplantation because of the high risk of graft failure. It is unknown whether DCD livers from older donors benefit from dynamic preservation.

METHODS

In a multicenter study, we retrospectively compared graft and patient outcomes after transplantation of livers from DCD donors older than 60 y, preserved with either static cold storage (SCS), ex situ sequential dual hypothermic perfusion, controlled oxygenated rewarming, and normothermic perfusion (DHOPE-COR-NMP), or in situ abdominal normothermic regional perfusion (aNRP).

RESULTS

Fifty-six liver transplants were included in the SCS cohort, 33 in the DHOPE-COR-NMP cohort, and 27 in the aNRP cohort. Donor warm ischemia time was significantly shorter in the SCS group than in DHOPE-COR-NMP (P < 0.001) and aNRP (P < 0.001) groups. Cold ischemia times were similar. One-year incidence of nonanastomotic biliary strictures was lower after DHOPE-COR-NMP (3%, P = 0.03) or aNRP (7%, P = 0.13), compared with SCS alone (21%). Anastomotic strictures were less frequent in aNRP (19%) compared with DHOPE-COR-NMP (52%; P = 0.015). One-year graft and patient survival were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic preservation allows safe transplantation of livers from DCD donors aged 60 y or older. The risk of nonanastomotic strictures was significantly lower after DHOPE-COR-NMP than after SCS, despite longer donor warm ischemia times.

Role of the Lymphocyte Count-to-C-Reactive Protein Ratio in the Risk Stratification for High EASE Scores After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Background: Early allograft failure (EAF) significantly contributes to mortality, necessitating re-transplantation following liver transplantation. The EAF simplified estimation (EASE) score has been recently developed to predict EAF. We aimed to assess the predictive capacity of high EASE scores for EAF and postoperative outcomes and to evaluate the association between the lymphocyte count-to-C-reactive protein ratio (LCR) and high EASE scores after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 808 patients who underwent LDLT. After excluding 16 patients with incomplete laboratory data, the final cohort included 792 patients. Patients with EASE scores ≥-0.74 were categorized into the high EASE group. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association between the LCR and high EASE scores. Results: High EASE scores demonstrated superior predictive accuracy for EAF development relative to that of the early allograft dysfunction (EAD) model (p = 0.018) and were more closely associated with overall mortality (p = 0.033). A preoperative LCR < 12.7 significantly increased the odds (odds ratio, 3.3; confidence interval, 1.997-5.493) of exhibiting high EASE scores post-LDLT, alongside preoperative hematocrit levels, operative duration, intraoperative continuous renal replacement therapy, administered calcium dose, mean heart rate, and donor age. Conclusions: The EASE score could offer enhanced utility for predicting EAF and overall mortality following LDLT relative to that of EAD. Identifying and managing risk factors, including low LCR values, for elevated EASE scores is essential for improving patient prognoses.

Multinational Analysis of Marginal Liver Grafts Based on the Eurotransplant Extended Donor Criteria

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of marginal liver grafts based on the Eurotransplant extended criteria donor (ECD) criteria.

BACKGROUND

Eurotransplant uses a broad definition of ECD criteria (age >65 years, steatosis >40%, body mass index >30 kg/m 2 , intensive care unit stay >7 days, donation after circulatory death, and certain laboratory parameters) for allocating organs to recipients who have consented to marginal grafts. Historically, marginal liver grafts were associated with increased rates of dysfunction.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis using the German Transplant Registry and the U.S. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) from 2006 to 2016. Results were validated with recent SRTR data (2017-2022). Donors were classified according to the Eurotransplant ECD criteria, donation after circulatory death was excluded. Data were analyzed with cutoff prediction, binomial logistic regression, and multivariate Cox regression.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 92,330 deceased brain-dead donors (87% SRTR) and 70,374 transplants (87% SRTR) in adult recipients. Predominant ECD factors were donor age in Germany (30%) and body mass index in the United States (28%). Except for donor age, grafts meeting ECD criteria were not associated with impaired 1 or 3-year survival. Cutoffs had little to no predictive value for 30-day graft survival (area under the receiver operating curve: 0.49-0.52) and were nominally higher for age (72 vs 65 years) in Germany as compared with those defined by current Eurotransplant criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of transplanted grafts from higher risk donors was nearly equal to standard donors with Eurotransplant criteria failing to predict survival of marginal grafts. Modifying ECD criteria could improve graft allocation and potentially expand the donor pool.

Reappraisal of Donor Age in Liver Transplantation: NASH as a Potential Target to Safely Utilize Old Liver Grafts

BACKGROUND

With the chronic shortage of donated organs, expanding the indications for liver transplantation (LT) from older donors is critical. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) stands out because of its unique systemic pathogenesis and high recurrence rate, both of which might make donor selection less decisive. The present study aims to investigate the usefulness of old donors in LT for NASH patients.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Scientific Registry Transplant Recipient database. The cohort was divided into 3 categories according to donor age: young (aged 16-35), middle-aged (36-59), and old donors (60-). Multivariable and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to compare the risk of donor age on graft survival (GS).

RESULTS

A total of 67 973 primary adult donation-after-brain-death LTs (2002-2016) were eligible for analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a reduced impact of donor age on GS for the NASH cohort (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.27), comparing old to middle-aged donors. If the cohort was limited to NASH recipients plus 1 of the following, recipient age ≥60, body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30, adjusted hazard ratios were even smaller (0.99 [0.84-1.15], 0.92 [0.75-1.13], or 1.04 [0.91-1.19], respectively). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant differences in overall GS between old- and middle-aged donors in these subgroups ( P = 0.86, 0.28, and 0.11, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor age was less influential for overall GS in NASH cohort. Remarkably, old donors were equivalent to middle-aged donors in subgroups of recipient age ≥60, recipient body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30.

Liver Transplantation from Elderly Donors (≥85 Years Old)

BACKGROUND

Despite the ongoing trend of increasing donor ages in liver transplantation (LT) setting, a notable gap persists in the availability of comprehensive guidelines for the utilization of organs from elderly donors. This study aimed to evaluate the viability of livers grafts from donors aged ≥85 years and report the post-LT outcomes compared with those from "ideal" donors under 40 years old.

METHODS

Conducted retrospectively at a single center from 2005 to 2023, this study compared outcomes of LTs from donors aged ≥85 y/o and ≤40 y/o, with the propensity score matching to the recipient's gender, age, BMI, MELD score, redo-LT, LT indication, and cause of donor death.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients received grafts from donors ≥85 y/o and were compared to 349 liver grafts from donors ≤40 y/o. Prior to PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% for the elderly group and 77% for the young group (p = 0.002). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival was 63% and 73% (p = 0.1). A nomogram, developed at the time of graft acceptance and including HCC features, predicted 10-year survival after LT using a graft from a donor aged ≥85.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of organ scarcity, elderly donors emerge as a partial solution. Nonetheless, without proper selection, LT using very elderly donors yields inferior long-term outcomes compared to transplantation from very young donors ≤40 y/o. The resulting nomogram based on pre-transplant criteria allows for the optimization of elderly donor/recipient matching to achieve satisfactory long-term results, in addition to traditional matching methods.

Current Understanding of Marginal Grafts in Liver Transplantation

End-stage liver disease (ESLD), stemming from a spectrum of chronic liver pathologies including chronic liver failure, acute cirrhosis decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma, imposes a significant global healthcare burden. Liver transplantation (LT) remains the only treatment for ESLD. However, the escalating mortality on transplant waitlists has prompted the utilization of marginal liver grafts in LT procedures. These grafts primarily encompass elderly livers, steatotic livers, livers from donation after circulatory death, split livers and those infected with the hepatitis virus. While the expansion of the donor pool offers promise, it also introduces concomitant risks. These encompass graft failure, biliary and cardiovascular complications, the recurrence of liver disease and reduced patient and graft survival. Consequently, various established strategies, ranging from improved donor-recipient matching to surgical interventions, have emerged to mitigate these risks. This article undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the current landscape, evaluating the viability of diverse marginal liver grafts. Additionally, it synthesizes approaches aimed at enhancing the quality of such marginal liver grafts. The overarching objective is to augment the donor pool and ameliorate the risk factors associated with the shortage of liver grafts.

An Overview of Liver Transplantation: Current Status, Recent Techniques, and Challenges-Perspectives From a Center in China

Liver transplantation is the best way to treat end-stage liver disease.With benefits from enhanced techniques, refined management, and advanced medications, liver transplant boasts a commendable 5-year survival rate for recipients. Nevertheless, acquiring the perioperative management and surgical skills essential for liver transplant is a time-consuming process for new surgeons. In addition, COVID-19 has also affected the field. Based on our actual situation in China, we have provided an overview of donor evaluation,recipient selection,transplant procedures, postoperative complications and management, longterm management, and pandemic strategies to guide new clinical surgeons in the field.

Impact of donor age on short-term outcomes after pediatric split liver transplantation

Background

Donor shortage is an important limitation of liver transplantation (LT). Split liver transplantation (SLT) may increase the sources of donors and reduce the problem of organ shortage. However, there are no standard criteria of the selection of SLT donor, especially regarding the donor age.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of children who received initial SLT between January 2015 and December 2021. Based on the age of donors, the patients were divided into groups A (1-10 years old; n = 26), B (10-45 years old; n = 87), and C (45-55 years old; n = 27). The short-term (<1 year after SLT) outcomes of the recipients were analyzed.

Results

A total of 140 patients received SLT from 122 donors. The 1-, 3- and 12-month patient survival rates in group A were 100.0%, and the graft survival rates were 92.3%. The 1-, 3- and 12-month survival rates of patient and graft in group B were 97.7%, 96.6%, and 95.0%, respectively, and in group C were 85.2%, 85.2%, and 81.1%, respectively. The patient survival rate was significantly lower in group C than in groups A and B (p = 0.0082). There was no significant difference in graft survival between the three groups (p = 0.0545).

Conclusions

Similar results were obtained for pediatric SLT with donors <10 years old and 10-45 years old. Pediatric SLT can be performed with older donors (45-55 years) after strict donor selection and selection of appropriate recipients.

Machine Perfusion for Extended Criteria Donor Livers: What Challenges Remain?

Based on the renaissance of dynamic preservation techniques, extended criteria donor (ECD) livers reclaimed a valuable eligibility in the transplantable organ pool. Being more vulnerable to ischemia, ECD livers carry an increased risk of early allograft dysfunction, primary non-function and biliary complications and, hence, unveiled the limitations of static cold storage (SCS). There is growing evidence that dynamic preservation techniques—dissimilar to SCS—mitigate reperfusion injury by reconditioning organs prior transplantation and therefore represent a useful platform to assess viability. Yet, a debate is ongoing about the advantages and disadvantages of different perfusion strategies and their best possible applications for specific categories of marginal livers, including organs from donors after circulatory death (DCD) and brain death (DBD) with extended criteria, split livers and steatotic grafts. This review critically discusses the current clinical spectrum of livers from ECD donors together with the various challenges and posttransplant outcomes in the context of standard cold storage preservation. Based on this, the potential role of machine perfusion techniques is highlighted next. Finally, future perspectives focusing on how to achieve higher utilization rates of the available donor pool are highlighted.

Prädiktoren für erfolgreiche Lebertransplantationen und Risikofaktoren

Die Lebertransplantation ist die einzige kurative Therapieoption einer chronischen Leberinsuffizienz im Endstadium. Daneben stellen onkologische Lebererkrankungen wie das HCC eine weitere Indikation für die Lebertransplantation dar, ebenso wie das akute Leberversagen.

Seit der ersten erfolgreichen Lebertransplantation durch Professor Thomas E. Starzl im Jahr 1967 haben sich nicht nur die chirurgischen, immunologischen und anästhesiologischen Techniken und Möglichkeiten geändert, sondern auch die Indikationen und das Patientengut. Hinzu kommt, dass die Empfänger ein zunehmendes Lebensalter und damit einhergehend mehr Begleiterkrankungen aufweisen.

Die Zahl an Lebertransplantationen ist weltweit weiter ansteigend. Es benötigen aber mehr Menschen eine Lebertransplantation, als Organe zur Verfügung stehen. Dies liegt am zunehmenden Bedarf an Spenderorganen bei gleichzeitig weiter rückläufiger Zahl postmortaler Organspenden.

Diese Diskrepanz zwischen Spenderorganen und Empfängern kann nur zu einem kleinen Teil durch Split-Lebertransplantationen oder die Leberlebendspende kompensiert werden.

Um den Spenderpool zu erweitern, werden zunehmend auch marginale Organe, die nur die erweiterten Spenderkriterien („extended donor criteria [EDC]“) erfüllen, allokiert. In manchen Ländern zählen hierzu auch die sogenannten DCD-Organe (DCD: „donation after cardiac death“), d. h. Organe, die erst nach dem kardiozirkulatorischen Tod des Spenders entnommen werden.

Es ist bekannt, dass marginale Spenderorgane mit einem erhöhten Risiko für ein schlechteres Transplantat- und Patientenüberleben nach Lebertransplantation einhergehen.

Um die Qualität marginaler Spenderorgane zu verbessern, hat sich eine rasante Entwicklung der Techniken der Organkonservierung über die letzten Jahre gezeigt. Mit der maschinellen Organperfusion besteht beispielsweise die Möglichkeit, die Organqualität deutlich zu verbessern. Insgesamt haben sich die Risikokonstellationen von Spenderorgan und Transplantatempfänger deutlich geändert.

Aus diesem Grunde ist es von großer Bedeutung, spezifische Prädiktoren für eine erfolgreiche Lebertransplantation sowie die entsprechenden Risikofaktoren für einen schlechten postoperativen Verlauf zu kennen, um das bestmögliche Transplantat- und Patientenüberleben nach Lebertransplantation zu ermöglichen.

Diese Einflussfaktoren, inklusive möglicher Risiko-Scores, sollen hier ebenso wie die neuen technischen Möglichkeiten in der Lebertransplantation beleuchtet werden.

How Old Is Old? An Age-Stratified Analysis of Elderly Liver Donors above 65

In liver transplantation, older donor age is a well-known risk factor for dismal outcomes, especially due to the high susceptibility of older grafts to ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, whether the factors correlating with impaired graft and patient survival following the transplantation of older grafts follow a linear trend among elderly donors remains elusive. In this study, liver transplantations between January 2006 and May 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Ninety-two recipients of grafts from donors ≥65 years were identified and divided into two groups: (1) ≥65–69 and (2) ≥ 70 years. One-year patient survival was comparable between recipients of grafts from donors ≥65–69 and ≥70 years (78.9% and 70.0%). One-year graft survival was 73.1% (donor ≥65–69) and 62.5% (donor ≥ 70), while multivariate analysis revealed superior one-year graft survival to be associated with a donor age of ≥65–69. No statistically significant differences were found for rates of primary non-function. The influence of donor age on graft and patient survival appears not to have a distinct impact on dismal outcomes in the range of 65–70 years. The impact of old donor age needs to be balanced with other risk factors, as these donors provide grafts that offer a lifesaving graft function.

Primary Nonfunction of the Liver Allograft

Severe allograft dysfunction, as opposed to the expected immediate function, following liver transplantation is a major complication, and the clinical manifestations of such that lead to either immediate retransplant or death are the catastrophic end of the spectrum. Primary nonfunction (PNF) has declined in incidence over the years, yet the impact on patient and healthcare teams, and the burden on the organ pool in case of the need for retransplant should not be underestimated. There is no universal test to define the diagnosis of PNF, and current criteria are based on various biochemical parameters surrogate of liver function; moreover, a disparity remains within different healthcare systems on selecting candidates eligible for urgent retransplantation. The impact on PNF from traditionally accepted risk factors has changed somewhat, mainly driven by the rising demand for organs, combined with the concerted approach by clinicians on the in-depth understanding of PNF, optimal graft recipient selection, mitigation of the clinical environment in which a marginal graft is reperfused, and postoperative management. Regardless of the mode, available data suggest machine perfusion strategies help reduce the incidence further but do not completely avert the risk of PNF. The mainstay of management relies on identifying severe allograft dysfunction at a very early stage and aggressive management, while excluding other identifiable causes that mimic severe organ dysfunction. This approach may help salvage some grafts by preventing total graft failure and also maintaining a patient in an optimal physiological state if retransplantation is considered the ultimate patient salvage strategy.

Post-transplant hepatic fibrosis in pediatric liver-small bowel transplant recipients: A single-center, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prevalence of hepatic graft fibrosis in combined LSBT children. We aimed to determine the prevalence of and identify potential predictors for hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children and to compare them with those in LT children.

METHODS

We retrospectively included children younger than 19 years who had received a primary LT/LSBT between 2000 and 2018 and had a liver biopsy performed at least 6 months post-transplant. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to determine predictors associated with significant hepatic graft fibrosis (≥F2) in LSBT vs LT children.

RESULTS

Ninety-six children (47 LSBT, 54 females) were included. The median post-transplant follow-up (years) was 12.8 in LT vs 10.5 in LSBT patients (P = .06). Hepatic graft fibrosis was found in 81.6% of LT vs 70.2% of LSBT children (P = .19), after a median time of 2.5 years and 2.6 years, respectively. On multivariate analyses, having post-transplant biliary complications was found to be associated with significant graft fibrosis in LT children, whereas AST/ALT ratio was found to predict significant hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children. The use of parenteral nutrition after transplant was not associated with significant hepatic graft fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children did not significantly differ from that in LT children, but the predictors may differ. Future studies should investigate the role of post-transplant autoimmune antibodies and donor-specific antibodies in the development and progression of hepatic graft fibrosis in LSBT children.

Extended criteria grafts and emerging therapeutics strategy in liver transplantation. The unstable balance between damage and repair

Due to increasing demand for donor organs, "extended criteria" donors are increasingly considered for liver transplantation, including elderly donors and donors after cardiac death. The grafts of this subgroup of donors share a major risk to develop significant features of ischemia reperfusion injury, that may eventually lead to graft failure. Ex-situ machine perfusion technology has gained much interest in liver transplantation, because represents both a useful tool for improving graft quality before transplantation and a platform for the delivery of therapeutics directly to the organ. In this review, we survey ongoing clinical evidences supporting the use of elderly and DCD donors in liver transplantation, and the underlying mechanistic aspects of liver aging and ischemia reperfusion injury that influence graft quality and transplant outcome. Finally, we highlight evidences in the field of new therapeutics to test in MP in the context of recent findings of basic and translational research.

Early Allograft Dysfunction Increases Hospital Associated Costs After Liver Transplantation-A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Concepts to ameliorate the continued mismatch between demand for liver allografts and supply include the acceptance of allografts that meet extended donor criteria (ECD). ECD grafts are generally associated with an increased rate of complications such as early allograft dysfunction (EAD). The costs of liver transplantation for the health care system with respect to specific risk factors remain unclear and are subject to change. We analyzed 317 liver transplant recipients from 2013 to 2018 for outcome after liver transplantation and hospital costs in a German transplant center. In our study period, 1-year survival after transplantation was 80.1% (95% confidence interval: 75.8%-84.6%) and median hospital stay was 33 days (interquartile rage: 24), with mean hospital costs of €115,924 (SD €113,347). There was a positive correlation between costs and laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (r_s = 0.48, P < 0.001), and the development of EAD increased hospital costs by €26,229. ECD grafts were not associated with a higher risk of EAD in our cohort. When adjusting for recipient-associated risk factors such as laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, recipient age, and split liver transplantation with propensity score matching, only EAD and cold ischemia increased total costs. Conclusion: Our data show that EAD leads to significantly higher hospital costs for liver transplantation, which are primarily attributed to recipient health status. Strategies to reduce the incidence of EAD are needed to control costs in liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation versus watchful waiting in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with complete response to bridging therapy - a retrospective observational study

Bridging therapy to prevent progression on the waiting list can result in a sustained complete response (sCR). In some patients, the liver transplantation (LT) risk might exceed those of tumor recurrence. We thus evaluated whether a watchful waiting (CR-WW) strategy could be a feasible alternative to transplantation (CR-LT). We performed a retrospective analysis of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with a sCR (CR > 6 months). Permitted bridging included thermoablation, resection, and combinations of either with transarterial chemoembolization. Patients were divided into the intended treatment strategies CR-WW and CR-LT. 39 (18.40%) sCR patients from 212 were investigated. 22 patients were treated with a CR-LT and 17 patients a CR-WW strategy. Five-year RFS was lower in the CR-WW than in the CR-LT group [53.3% (22.1%; 77.0%) and 84.0% (57.6%; 94.7%)]. 29.4% (5/17) CR-WW patients received salvage transplantation because of recurrence. OS (5-year) was 83.9% [56.8%; 94.7%] after LT and 75.4% [39.8%; 91.7%] after WW. Our analysis shows that the intuitive decision made by our patients in agreement with their treating physicians for a watchful waiting strategy in sCR can be justified. Applied on a larger scale, this strategy could help to reduce the pressure on the donor pool.

The Differential Influence of Cold Ischemia Time on Outcome After Liver Transplantation for Different Indications-Who Is at Risk? A Collaborative Transplant Study Report

Introduction: Despite increasing awareness of the negative impact of cold ischemia time (CIT) in liver transplantation, its precise influence in different subgroups of liver transplant recipients has not been analyzed in detail. This study aimed to identify liver transplant recipients with an unfavorable outcome due to prolonged cold ischemia. Methods: 40,288 adult liver transplantations, performed between 1998 and 2017 and reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study were analyzed. Results: Prolonged CIT significantly reduced graft and patient survival only during the first post-transplant year. On average, each hour added to the cold ischemia was associated with a 3.4% increase in the risk of graft loss (hazard ratio (HR) 1.034, P < 0.001). The impact of CIT was strongest in patients with hepatitis C-related (HCV) cirrhosis with a 24% higher risk of graft loss already at 8-9 h (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47, P = 0.011) and 64% higher risk at ≥14 h (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.30-2.09, P < 0.001). In contrast, patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and alcoholic cirrhosis tolerated longer ischemia times up to <10 and <12 h, respectively, without significant impact on graft survival (P = 0.47 and 0.42). In HCC patients with model of end-stage liver disease scores (MELD) <20, graft survival was not significantly impaired in the cases of CIT up to 13 h. Conclusion: The negative influence of CIT on liver transplant outcome depends on the underlying disease, patients with HCV-related cirrhosis being at the highest risk of graft loss due to prolonged cold ischemia. Grafts with longer cold preservation times should preferentially be allocated to recipients with alcoholic cirrhosis and HCC patients with MELD <20, in whom the effect of cold ischemia is less pronounced.

[High donor age for liver transplantation : Tackling organ scarcity in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is the only curative treatment option for patients with end-stage liver disease; however, the 40% decline of available organ donors in recent years in Germany necessitates the optimization of available resources and possibly extending the criteria to older donors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All 2652 livers made available to the Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin from 2010 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed and the clinical outcome of 526 liver transplantations during this time frame were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median age of donors of transplanted organs increased from 49.3 years in 2010 to 57.3 years in 2016 (p = 0.02). Organs from donors ≥65 years were more frequently discarded than organs from younger donors (n = 344, 18.4% vs. n = 220, 28.1%; p = 0.005). Moreover, the older donors had higher rates of diabetes mellitus and hepatic steatosis. Organs from older donors had a higher donor risk index (2.8 vs. 2.2; p < 0.001) and were transplanted more often in patients with preserved liver function and hepatocellular carcinoma and liver cirrhosis (n = 121, 74.7% of indications). The 3‑year survival after liver transplantation from donors ≥65 and ≥80 years old was not significantly reduced in comparison to younger donors; however, there was an increased retransplantation rate (28.6%; p = 0.005) after transplantation of organs from donors ≥80 years old.

CONCLUSION

Despite conservative organ acceptance there were higher rates of retransplantation after transplantation from very old donors. In the light of an increasing scarcity of suitable organs this mandates caution and highlights the need for adequate assessment instruments for marginal donor organs before transplantation.

Liver Grafts with Major Extended Donor Criteria May Expand the Organ Pool for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The major extended donor criteria (maEDC; steatosis >40%, age >65 years, and cold ischemia time >14 h) influence graft and patient outcomes after liver transplantation. Despite organ shortages, maEDC organs are often considered unsuitable for transplantation. We investigated the outcomes of maEDC organ liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Two hundred and sixty-four HCC liver transplant patients were eligible for analysis. Risk factor analysis was performed for early allograft dysfunction; primary nonfunction; 30-day and 90-day graft failure; and 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year patient mortality. One-year graft survival was higher in recipients of no-maEDC grafts. One-year patient survival did not differ between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs. The univariate and multivariate analyses revealed no association between maEDC grafts and one-year patient mortality. Graft survival differed between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs after correcting for a laboratory model of end-stage liver disease (labMELD) score with a cut-off value of 20, but patient survival did not. Patient survival did not differ between recipients who did and did not meet the Milan criteria and who received grafts with and without maEDC. Instead of being discarded, maEDC grafts may expand the organ pool for patients with HCC without impairing patient survival or recurrence-free survival.