How useful is the machine perfusion in liver transplantation? An answer from a national survey

Machine perfusion (MP) has been shown worldwide to offer many advantages in liver transplantation, but it still has some gray areas. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the donor risk factors of grafts, perfused with any MP, that might predict an ineffective MP setting and those would trigger post-transplant early allograft dysfunction (EAD). Data from donors of all MP-perfused grafts at six liver transplant centers have been analyzed, whether implanted or discarded after perfusion. The first endpoint was the negative events after perfusion (NegE), which is the number of grafts discarded plus those that were implanted but lost after the transplant. A risk factor analysis for NegE was performed and marginal grafts for MP were identified. Finally, the risk of EAD was analyzed, considering only implanted grafts. From 2015 to September 2019, 158 grafts were perfused with MP: 151 grafts were implanted and 7 were discarded after the MP phase because they did not reach viability criteria. Of 151, 15 grafts were lost after transplant, so the NegE group consisted of 22 donors. In univariate analysis, the donor risk index >1.7, the presence of hypertension in the medical history, static cold ischemia time, and the moderate or severe macrovesicular steatosis were the significant factors for NegE. Multivariate analysis confirmed that macrosteatosis >30% was an independent risk factor for NegE (odd ratio 5.643, p = 0.023, 95% confidence interval, 1.27–24.98). Of 151 transplanted patients, 34% experienced EAD and had worse 1- and 3-year-survival, compared with those who did not face EAD (NoEAD), 96% and 96% for EAD vs. 89% and 71% for NoEAD, respectively (p = 0.03). None of the donor/graft characteristics was associated with EAD even if the graft was moderately steatotic or fibrotic or from an aged donor. For the first time, this study shows that macrovesicular steatosis >30% might be a warning factor involved in the risk of graft loss or a cause of graft discard after the MP treatment. On the other hand, the MP seems to be useful in reducing the donor and graft weight in the development of EAD.

Major hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in elderly patients: is it reasonable?

Introduction

We sought to evaluate the effect of age on postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing major liver surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC).

Methods

77 patients were included. Patients were categorized into two groups: the “< 70-year-olds” group (n = 54) and the “≥ 70-year-olds” group (n = 23).

Results

Median LOS was 19 both for < 70-year-old group and ≥ 70-year-old group (P = 0.72). No differences in terms of severe complication were detected (44.4% Clavien–Dindo 3–4–5 in < 70-year-old group vs 47.8% in ≥ 70-year-old group, P = 0.60). Within 90 postoperative days, 11 patients died, 6 in < 70-year-old group (11.3%) and 5 in ≥ 70-year-old group (21.7%), P = 0.29. The median follow‐up was 20 months. The death rate was 72.2% and 78.3% among patients < 70 years old and ≥ 70 years old. The OS at 2 and 5 years was significantly higher among the < 70 years old (57.0% and 27.7%) compared to the ≥ 70 years old (27.1% and 13.6%), P = 0.043. Adjusting for hypertension and Charlson comorbidity index in a multivariate analysis, the HR for age was 1.93 (95% CI 0.84–4.44), P = 0.12. Relapse occurred in 43 (81.1%) patients in the < 70-year-old group and in 19 (82.6%) patients in the ≥ 70-year-old group. DFS at 12, 24, and 36 months was, respectively, 59.6, 34.2, and 23.2 for the < 70 -year-old group and 32.5, 20.3, and 13.5 for the ≥ 70-year-old group (P = 0.26). Adjusting for hypertension and Charlson comorbidity index in a Cox model, the HR for age was 1.52 (95% CI 0.67–3.46), with P = 0.32.

Conclusions

 ≥ 70-year-old patients with PHCC can still be eligible for major liver resection with acceptable complication rates and should not be precluded a priori from a radical treatment.

Dual Kidney Transplantation: Evaluation of Recipient Selection Criteria at Niguarda Hospital

BACKGROUND

Dual kidney transplantation (DKT) is a largely accepted strategy to enlarge the donor pool. Niguarda Hospital started this program in December 2010, and 38 DKT have been performed. In our series, we included recipients older than those in the other series published in literature. The aim of this study was to know if our recipient selection criteria for DKT are safe.

METHODS

We reviewed our data base of DKT and analyzed recipients' medical history, surgical technique, post-operative complications, graft survival, morbidity, and mortality. We then compared our results with the literature.

RESULTS

From December 2010 to April 2015, 38 DKT were performed in Niguarda Hospital. Delayed graft function was present in 21 recipients. Explantation of both kidneys was performed in 1 patient and explantation of 1 kidney in 6 patients. Post-operative complications were present in 8 patients. Five patients returned to hemodialysis after DKT. One recipient died of medical post-operative sepsis. The mean follow-up was 24 months. Graft survival and patient survival were 86.84% and 97.93%, respectively. Compared with the literature, our series had similar mortality and morbidity rates, even if recipients' age was higher than in other series.

CONCLUSIONS

The strategy of DKT allocation in elderly recipients is safe. Further studies have to be performed to optimized selection of the recipients for DKT not to disadvantage younger patients in the transplant waiting list and to improve the technique of organ evaluation and preservation to refine graft allocation.