Prediction of Graft Survival Post-liver Transplantation by L-GrAFT Risk Score Model, EASE Score, MEAF Scoring, and EAD

Portable hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion for organ preservation in liver transplantation: A randomized, open-label, clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In liver transplantation, cold preservation induces ischemia, resulting in significant reperfusion injury. Hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HMP-O 2 ) has shown benefits compared to static cold storage (SCS) by limiting ischemia-reperfusion injury. This study reports outcomes using a novel portable HMP-O 2 device in the first US randomized control trial.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

The PILOT trial (NCT03484455) was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial, with participants randomized to HMP-O 2 or SCS. HMP-O 2 livers were preserved using the Lifeport Liver Transporter and Vasosol perfusion solution. The primary outcome was early allograft dysfunction. Noninferiority margin was 7.5%. From April 3, 2019, to July 12, 2022, 179 patients were randomized to HMP-O 2 (n=90) or SCS (n=89). The per-protocol cohort included 63 HMP-O 2 and 73 SCS. Early allograft dysfunction occurred in 11.1% HMP-O 2 (N=7) and 16.4% SCS (N=12). The risk difference between HMP-O 2 and SCS was -5.33% (one-sided 95% upper confidence limit of 5.81%), establishing noninferiority. The risk of graft failure as predicted by Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplant score at seven days (L-GrAFT 7 ) was lower with HMP-O 2 [median (IQR) 3.4% (2.4-6.5) vs. 4.5% (2.9-9.4), p =0.024]. Primary nonfunction occurred in 2.2% of all SCS (n=3, p =0.10). Biliary strictures occurred in 16.4% SCS (n=12) and 6.3% (n=4) HMP-O 2 ( p =0.18). Nonanastomotic biliary strictures occurred only in SCS (n=4).

CONCLUSIONS

HMP-O 2 demonstrates safety and noninferior efficacy for liver graft preservation in comparison to SCS. Early allograft failure by L-GrAFT 7 was lower in HMP-O 2 , suggesting improved early clinical function. Recipients of HMP-O 2 livers also demonstrated a lower incidence of primary nonfunction and biliary strictures, although this difference did not reach significance.

From large-for-size to large-for-flow: A paradigm shift in liver transplantation

Liver graft-recipient matching remains challenging, and both morphologic and hemodynamic characteristics have been shown to be relevant indicators of post-transplant outcomes. However, no combined analysis is available to date. To study the impact of both morphologic and hemodynamic characteristics of liver grafts on transplantation outcomes, we retrospectively evaluated all consecutive 257 liver transplantations with prospective hemodynamic measurements from 2017 to 2020 in a single-center perspective. First, a morphologic analysis compared recipients with or without large-for-size (LFS), defined by a graft/recipient weight ratio >2.5% and excluding extreme LFS. Second, a hemodynamic analysis compared recipients with or without low portal flow (LPF; <80 mL/min per 100 g of liver tissue). Third, an outcome analysis combining LPF and LFS was performed, focusing on liver graft-related morbidity (LGRM), graft and patient survival. LGRM was a composite endpoint, including primary nonfunction, high-risk L-Graft7 category, and portal vein thrombosis. Morphologic analysis showed that LFS (n=33; 12.9%) was not associated with an increased LGRM (12.1% vs 9.4%; p =0.61) or impaired graft and patient survival. However, the hemodynamic analysis showed that LPF (n=43; 16.8%) was associated with a higher LGRM (20.9% vs 7.5%, p = 0.007) and a significantly impaired 90-day graft and patient survival. Multivariable analysis identified LPF but not LFS as an independent risk factor for LGRM (OR: 2.8%; CI:1.088-7.413; and p = 0.03), 90-day (HR: 4%; CI: 1.411-11.551; and p = 0 .01), and 1-year patient survival. LPF is a significant predictor of post-liver transplantation morbi-mortality, independent of LFS when defined as a morphologic metric alone. Consequently, we propose the novel concept of large-for-flow, which may guide graft selection and improve perioperative management of LPF.

L-GrAFT7 has High Accuracy in Predicting Early Allograft Failure after Liver Transplantation: A Multicenter Cohort Study in China

Background and Aims

Increasing utilization of extended criteria donor leads to an increasing rate of early allograft failure after liver transplantation. However, consensus of definition of early allograft failure is lacking.

Methods

A retrospective, multicenter study was performed to validate the Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplantation (L-GrAFT) risk model in a Chinese cohort of 942 adult patients undergoing primary liver transplantation at three Chinese centers. L-GrAFT (L-GrAFT7 and L-GrAFT10) was compared with existing models: the Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation (EASE) score, the model of early allograft function (MEAF), and the Early Allograft Dysfunction (EAD) model. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to find risk factors of L-GrAFT high-risk group.

Results

L-GrAFT7 had an area under the curve of 0.85 in predicting 90-day graft survival, significantly superior to MEAF [area under the curve (AUC=0.78, p=0.044)] and EAD (AUC=0.78, p=0.006), while there was no statistical significance between the predicting abilities of L-GrAFT7 and EASE (AUC=0.84, p>0.05). Furthermore, L-GrAFT7 maintains good predicting ability in the subgroup of high-donor risk index (DRI) cases (AUC=0.83 vs. MEAF, p=0.007 vs. EAD, p=0.014) and recipients of donors after cardiac death (AUC=0.92 vs. EAD, p<0.001). Through multivariate analysis, pretransplant bilirubin level, units of packed red blood cells, and the DRI score were selected as independent risk factors of a L-GrAFT7 high-risk group.

Conclusions

The accuracy of L-GrAFT7 in predicting early allograft failure was validated in a Chinese multicenter cohort, indicating that it has the potential to become an accurate endpoint of clinical practice and transitional study of machine perfusion.

Routine End-ischemic Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion in Liver Transplantation From Donors After Brain Death: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether end-ischemic hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE) is superior to static cold storage (SCS) in preserving livers procured from donors after brain death (DBD).

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence of the benefits of HOPE in liver transplantation, but predominantly in the setting of high-risk donors.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, livers procured from DBDs were randomly assigned to either end-ischemic dual HOPE for at least 2 hours or SCS (1:3 allocation ratio). The Model for Early Allograft Function (MEAF) was the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measure was 90-day morbidity (ClinicalTrials. gov, NCT04812054).

RESULTS

Of the 104 liver transplantations included in the study, 26 were assigned to HOPE and 78 to SCS. Mean MEAF was 4.94 and 5.49 in the HOPE and SCS groups ( P =0.24), respectively, with the corresponding rates of MEAF >8 of 3.8% (1/26) and 15.4% (12/78; P =0.18). Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 20.9 after transplantations with HOPE and 21.8 after transplantations with SCS ( P =0.19). Transaminase activity, bilirubin concentration, and international normalized ratio were similar in both groups. In the case of donor risk index >1.70, HOPE was associated with significantly lower mean MEAF (4.92 vs 6.31; P =0.037) and lower median Comprehensive Complication Index (4.35 vs 22.6; P =0.050). No significant differences between HOPE and SCS were observed for lower donor risk index values.

CONCLUSION

Routine use of HOPE in DBD liver transplantations does not seem justified as the clinical benefits are limited to high-risk donors.

A randomized-controlled trial of ischemia-free liver transplantation for end-stage liver disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) has thus far been considered as an inevitable component of organ transplantation, compromising outcomes, and limiting organ availability. Ischemia-free organ transplantation is a novel approach designed to avoid IRI, with the potential to improve outcomes.

METHODS

In this randomized-controlled clinical trial, recipients of livers from donors after brain death were randomly assigned to receive either an ischemia-free or a 'conventional' transplant. The primary endpoint was the incidence of early allograft dysfunction. Secondary endpoints included complications related to graft IRI.

RESULTS

Out of 68 randomized patients, 65 underwent transplants and were included in the analysis. 32 patients received ischemia-free liver transplantation (IFLT), and 33 received conventional liver transplantation (CLT). Early allograft dysfunction occurred in two recipients (6%) randomized to IFLT and in eight (24%) randomized to CLT (difference -18%; 95% CI -35% to -1%; p = 0.044). Post-reperfusion syndrome occurred in three recipients (9%) randomized to IFLT and in 21 (64%) randomized to CLT (difference -54%; 95% CI -74% to -35%; p <0.001). Non-anastomotic biliary strictures diagnosed with protocol magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 12 months were observed in two recipients (8%) randomized to IFLT and in nine (36%) randomized to CLT (difference, -28%; 95% CI -50% to -7%; p = 0.014). The comprehensive complication index at 1 year after transplantation was 30.48 (95% CI 23.25-37.71) in the IFLT group vs. 42.14 (95% CI 35.01-49.26) in the CLT group (difference -11.66; 95% CI -21.81 to -1.51; p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with end-stage liver disease, IFLT significantly reduced complications related to IRI compared to a conventional approach.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

chictr.org. ChiCTR1900021158.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Ischemia-reperfusion injury has thus far been considered as an inevitable event in organ transplantation, compromising outcomes and limiting organ availability. Ischemia-free liver transplantation is a novel approach of transplanting donor livers without interruption of blood supply. We showed that in patients with end-stage liver disease, ischemia-free liver transplantation, compared with a conventional approach, led to reduced complications related to ischemia-reperfusion injury in this randomized trial. This new approach is expected to change the current practice in organ transplantation, improving transplant outcomes, increasing organ utilization, while providing a clinical model to delineate the impact of organ injury on alloimmunity.

Validation of risk scores for allograft failure after liver transplantation in Germany: a retrospective cohort analysis

A growing number of clinical risk scores have been proposed to predict allograft failure after liver transplantation. However, validation of currently available scores in the Eurotransplant region is still lacking. We aimed to analyze all clinically relevant donor and recipient risk scores on a large German liver transplantation data set and performed a retrospective cohort analysis of liver transplantations performed at the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin from January 2007 until December 2021 with organs from donation after brain death. We analyzed 9 previously published scores in 906 liver transplantations [Eurotransplant donor risk index (ET-DRI/DRI), donor age and model for end-stage liver disease (D-MELD), balance of risk (BAR), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), model for early allograft function (MEAF), liver graft assessment following transplantation (L-GrAFT7), early allograft failure simplified estimation (EASE), and a score by Rhu and colleagues). The EASE score had the best predictive value for 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month graft survival with a c-statistic of 0.8, 0.77, and 0.78, respectively. In subgroup analyses, the EASE score was suited best for male recipients with a high-MELD (>25) and an EAD organ. Scores only based on pretransplant data performed worse compared to scores including postoperative data (eg, ET-DRI vs. EAD, p<0.001 at 3-month graft survival). Out of these, the BAR score performed best with a c-statistic of 0.6. This a comprehensive comparison of the clinical utility of risk scores after liver transplantation. The EASE score sufficiently predicted 12-month graft and patient survival. Despite a relatively complex calculation, the EASE score provides significant prognostic value for patients and health care professionals in the Eurotransplant region.