Results of the first year of the new liver allocation plan

Recent outcomes of liver transplantation for Budd-Chiari syndrome: A study of the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR) and affiliated centers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Management of Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) has improved over the last decades. The main aim was to evaluate the contemporary post-liver transplant (post-LT) outcomes in Europe.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Data from all patients who underwent transplantation from 1976 to 2020 was obtained from the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR). Patients < 16 years, with secondary BCS or HCC were excluded. Patient survival (PS) and graft survival (GS) before and after 2000 were compared. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified predictors of PS and GS after 2000. Supplemental data was requested from all ELTR-affiliated centers and received from 44. In all, 808 patients underwent transplantation between 2000 and 2020. One-, 5- and 10-year PS was 84%, 77%, and 68%, and GS was 79%, 70%, and 62%, respectively. Both significantly improved compared to outcomes before 2000 ( p < 0.001). Median follow-up was 50 months and retransplantation rate was 12%. Recipient age (aHR:1.04,95%CI:1.02-1.06) and MELD score (aHR:1.04,95%CI:1.01-1.06), especially above 30, were associated with worse PS, while male sex had better outcomes (aHR:0.63,95%CI:0.41-0.96). Donor age was associated with worse PS (aHR:1.01,95%CI:1.00-1.03) and GS (aHR:1.02,95%CI:1.01-1.03). In 353 patients (44%) with supplemental data, 33% had myeloproliferative neoplasm, 20% underwent TIPS pre-LT, and 85% used anticoagulation post-LT. Post-LT anticoagulation was associated with improved PS (aHR:0.29,95%CI:0.16-0.54) and GS (aHR:0.48,95%CI:0.29-0.81). Hepatic artery thrombosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) occurred in 9% and 7%, while recurrent BCS was rare (3%).

CONCLUSIONS

LT for BCS results in excellent patient- and graft-survival. Older recipient or donor age and higher MELD are associated with poorer outcomes, while long-term anticoagulation improves both patient and graft outcomes.

MELD 3.0 in Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

The MELD (model for end-stage liver disease) 3.0 score was developed to replace the MELD-Na score that is currently used to prioritize liver allocation for cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation in the United States. The MELD 3.0 calculator includes new inputs from patient sex and serum albumin levels and has new weights for serum sodium, bilirubin, international normalized ratio, and creatinine levels. It is expected that use of MELD 3.0 scores will reduce overall waitlist mortality modestly and improve access for female liver transplant candidates. The utility of MELD 3.0 and PELDcre (pediatric end-stage liver disease, creatinine) scores for risk stratification in cirrhotic patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, and other interventions requires further study. This article reviews the background of the MELD score and the rationale to create MELD 3.0 as well as potential implications of using this newer risk stratification tool in clinical practice.

Impact of Median MELD at Transplant Minus 3 National Policy on Quality of Transplanted Livers for Patients With and Without Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been overprioritized in the deceased donor liver allocation system. The United Network for Organ Sharing adopted a policy in May 2019 that limited HCC exception points to the median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at transplant in the listing region minus 3. We hypothesized this policy change would increase the likelihood to transplant marginal quality livers into HCC patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of a national transplant registry, including adult deceased donor liver transplant recipients with and without HCC from May 18, 2017, to May 18, 2019 (prepolicy) to May 19, 2019, to March 1, 2021 (postpolicy). Transplanted livers were considered of marginal quality if they met ≥1 of the following: (1) donation after circulatory death, (2) donor age ≥70, (3) macrosteatosis ≥30% and (4) donor risk index ≥95th percentile. We compared characteristics across policy periods and by HCC status.

RESULTS

A total of 23 164 patients were included (11 339 prepolicy and 11 825 postpolicy), 22.7% of whom received HCC exception points (prepolicy versus postpolicy: 26.1% versus 19.4%; P = 0.03). The percentage of transplanted donor livers meeting marginal quality criteria decreased for non-HCC (17.3% versus 16.0%; P < 0.001) but increased for HCC (17.7% versus 19.4%; P < 0.001) prepolicy versus postpolicy. After adjusting for recipient characteristics, HCC recipients had 28% higher odds of being transplanted with marginal quality liver independent of policy period (odds ratio: 1.28; confidence interval, 1.09-1.50; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at transplant in the listing region minus 3 policy limited exception points and decreased the quality of livers received by HCC patients.

Liver transplantation in Latin America: reality and challenges

Healthcare systems in Latin America are broadly heterogeneous, but all of them are burdened by a dramatic rise in liver disease. Some challenges that these countries face include an increase in patients requiring a transplant, insufficient rates of organ donation, delayed referral, and inequitable or suboptimal access to liver transplant programs and post-transplant care. This could be improved by expanding the donor pool through the implementation of education programs for citizens and referring physicians, as well as the inclusion of extended criteria donors, living donors and split liver transplantation. Addressing these shortcomings will require national shifts aimed at improving infrastructure, increasing awareness of organ donation, training medical personnel, and providing equitable access to care for all patients.

THE OPTIMUM LEVEL OF MELD TO MINIMIZE THE MORTALITY ON LIVER TRANSPLANTATION WAITING LIST, AND LIVER TRANSPLANTED PATIENT IN SÃO PAULO STATE, BRAZIL

BACKGROUND

After validation in multiple types of liver disease patients, the MELD score was adopted as a standard by which liver transplant candidates with end-stage liver disease were prioritized for organ allocation in the United States since 2002, and in Brazil, since 2006.

AIMS

To analyze the mortality profile of patients on the liver transplant waiting list correlated to MELD score at the moment of transplantation.

METHODS

This study used the data from the Secretary of Health of the São Paulo State, Brazil, which listed 22,522 patients, from 2006 (when MELD score was introduced in Brazil) until June 2009. Patients with acute hepatic failure and tumors were included as well. We also considered the mortality of both non-transplanted and transplanted patients as a function of the MELD score at presentation.

RESULTS

Our model showed that the best MELD score for patients on the liver transplant waiting list associated to better results after liver transplantation was 26.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the best score for applying to liver transplant waiting list in the State of São Paulo was 26. This is the score that minimizes the mortality in both non-transplanted and liver transplanted patients.

Liver Transplantation 2023: Status Report, Current and Future Challenges

Liver transplantation offers live-saving therapy for patients with complications of cirrhosis and stage T2 hepatocellular carcinoma. The demand for organs far outstrips the supply, and innovations aimed at increasing the number of usable deceased donors as well as alternative donor sources are a major focus. The etiologies of cirrhosis are shifting over time, with more need for transplantation among patients with alcohol-associated liver disease and nonalcoholic/metabolic fatty liver disease and less for viral hepatitis, although hepatitis B remains an important indication for transplant in countries with high endemicity. The rise in transplantation for alcohol-associated liver disease and nonalcoholic/metabolic fatty liver disease has brought attention to how patients are selected for transplantation and the strategies needed to prevent recurrent disease. In this review, we present a status report on the most pressing topics in liver transplantation and future challenges.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Time to Treatment Initiation: A National Cancer Database Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic strained oncologic care access and delivery, yet little is known about how it impacted hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) management. Our study sought to evaluate the annual effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on time to treatment initiation (TTI) for HCC.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients diagnosed with clinical stages I-IV HCC (2017-2020). Patients were categorized based on their year of diagnosis as "Pre-COVID" (2017-2019) and "COVID" (2020). TTI based on stage and type of treatment first received was compared by the Mann-Whitney U test. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate factors of increased TTI and treatment delay (> 90 days).

RESULTS

In total, 18,673 patients were diagnosed during Pre-COVID, whereas 5249 were diagnosed during COVID. Median TTI for any first-line treatment modality was slightly shorter during the COVID year compared with Pre-COVID (49 vs. 51 days; p < 0.0001), notably in time to ablation (52 vs. 55 days; p = 0.0238), systemic therapy (42 vs. 47 days; p < 0.0001), and radiation (60 vs. 62 days; p = 0.0177), but not surgery (41 vs. 41 days; p = 0.6887). In a multivariate analysis, patients of Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and uninsured/Medicaid/Other Government insurance status were associated with increased TTI by factors of 1.057 (95% CI: 1.022-1.093; p = 0.0013), 1.045 (95% CI: 1.010-1.081; p = 0.0104), and 1.088 (95% CI: 1.053-1.123; p < 0.0001), respectively. Similarly, these patient populations were associated with delayed treatment times.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients diagnosed during COVID, TTI for HCC, while statistically significant, had no clinically significant differences. However, vulnerable patients were more likely to have increased TTI.

Six-Minute walk distance predicts outcomes in liver transplant candidates

A 6-minute walk test is a simple tool for assessing submaximal exercise capacity. We sought to determine whether a 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) predicts outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. The Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease 2 study is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that enrolled adults with portal hypertension during liver transplantation evaluation. We excluded subjects with an incident or prevalent portopulmonary hypertension. The 6-minute walk test was performed using standardized methods. Cox proportional hazards modeling and multivariable linear regression analysis were performed to determine the relationship between baseline 6MWD and outcomes. The study sample included 352 subjects. The mean 6MWD was 391±101 m. For each 50-meter decrease in 6MWD, there was a 25% increase in the risk of death (HR 1.25, 95% CI [1.11, 1.41], p < 0.001) after adjustment for age, gender, body mass index, MELD-Na, and liver transplant as a time-varying covariate. In a multistate model, each 50-meter decrease in 6MWD was associated with an increased risk of death before the liver transplant ( p < 0.001) but not after the transplant. 6MWD was similar to MELD-Na in discriminating mortality. Each 50-meter decrease in 6MWD was associated with an increase in all-cause ( p < 0.001) and transplant-free hospitalizations ( p < 0.001) in multivariable models for time-to-recurrent events. Shorter 6MWD was associated with worse Short Form-36 physical ( p < 0.001) and mental component scores ( p = 0.05). In conclusion, shorter 6MWD is associated with an increased risk of death, hospitalizations, and worse quality of life in patients evaluated for liver transplantation. The 6-minute walk distance may be a useful adjunct for risk assessment in patients undergoing liver transplant evaluation.

Recipient Survival after Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Interpretable Machine Learning Survival Tree Algorithm for Patient-Specific Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Elucidating contributors affecting liver transplant survival is paramount. Current methods offer crude global group outcomes. To refine patient-specific mortality probability estimation and to determine covariate interaction using recipient and donor data, we generated a survival tree algorithm, Recipient Survival After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation (ReSOLT), using United Network Organ Sharing (UNOS) transplant data.

STUDY DESIGN

The UNOS database was queried for liver transplants in patients ≥18 years old between 2000 and 2021. Preoperative factors were evaluated with stepwise logistic regression; 43 significant factors were used in survival tree modeling. Graft survival of <7 days was excluded. The data were split into training and testing sets and further validated with 10-fold cross-validation. Survival tree pruning and model selection was achieved based on Akaike information criterion and log-likelihood values. Log-rank pairwise comparisons between subgroups and estimated survival probabilities were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 122,134 liver transplant patients were included for modeling. Multivariable logistic regression (area under the curve = 0.742, F1 = 0.822) and survival tree modeling returned 8 significant recipient survival factors: recipient age, donor age, recipient primary payment, recipient hepatitis C status, recipient diabetes, recipient functional status at registration and at transplantation, and deceased donor pulmonary infection. Twenty subgroups consisting of combinations of these factors were identified with distinct Kaplan-Meier survival curves (p < 0.001 among all by log rank test) with 5- and 10-year survival probabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival trees are a flexible and effective approach to understand the effects and interactions of covariates on survival. Individualized survival probability following liver transplant is possible with ReSOLT, allowing for more coherent patient and family counseling and prediction of patient outcome using both recipient and donor factors.

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.

Are Current National Review Board Downstaging Protocols for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Too Restrictive?

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is an effective strategy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To qualify for standardized LT model for end-stage liver disease exception points, the United Network for Organ Sharing National Liver Review Board (NLRB) requires that the presenting and final HCC tumor burden be within the University of California San Francisco criteria, which were recently expanded (within expanded UCSF [W-eUCSF]). Current NLRB criteria may be too restrictive because it has been shown previously that the initial burden does not predict LT failure when tumors downstage to UCSF. This study aims to assess LT outcomes for HCC initially presenting beyond expanded UCSF (B-eUCSF) criteria in a large multicenter collaboration.

STUDY DESIGN

Comparisons of B-eUCSF and W-eUCSF candidates undergoing LT at seven academic institutions between 2001 and 2017 were made from a multi-institutional database. Survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 1,846 LT recipients with HCC, 86 (5%) met B-eUCSF criteria at initial presentation, with the remainder meeting W-eUCSF criteria. Despite differences in tumor burden, B-eUCSF candidates achieved comparable 1-, 5- and 10-year overall (89%, 70%, and 55% vs 91%, 74%, and 60%, respectively; p = 0.2) and disease-free (82%, 60%, and 53% vs 89%, 71%, and 59%, respectively; p = 0.07) survival to patients meeting W-eUCSF criteria after LT. Despite increased tumor recurrence in B-eUCSF vs W-eUCSF patients (24% vs 10%, p = 0.0002), post-recurrence survival was similar in both groups (p = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

Transplantation for patients initially presenting with HCC B-eUSCF criteria offers a survival advantage similar to those with tumors meeting W-eUCSF criteria at presentation. The current NLRB policy is too stringent, and considerations to expand criteria should be discussed.

From Child-Pugh to MELD score and beyond: Taking a walk down memory lane

The Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) and the MELD (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease) scores were designed to predict the outcome of decompressive therapy for portal hypertension. They were prospectively validated to predict mortality risk in patients with a wide spectrum of liver disease etiology and severity. Unlike the CTP score, the MELD score was derived from prospectively gathered data. Its calculation was based on serum bilirubin, serum creatinine, international normalized ratio (INR) and etiology of liver disease. Instituting a continuous disease severity score that de-emphasizes waiting time resulted in better categorization of waiting patients and enhanced transparency. The US instituted the MELD system in 2002 and soon thereafter, MELD-based liver allocation was adopted throughout the world including Latin America. The most significant impact of MELD-based policies has been the reduction of waiting-list mortality. In the years after implementation of the MELD system, several options have been proposed to improve the MELD score's accuracy. Adding serum sodium (MELD-Na) increased the accuracy of the score in predicting waiting list mortality, thus completing the original MELD score as a prognostic model in liver allocation. On the 20th anniversary of the creation of MELD score we present a brief account of its development, its use to stratify patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation as well as its adoption as liver allocation system .

Building a Utility-based Liver Allocation Model in Preparation for Continuous Distribution

Background.

The current model for end-stage liver disease-based liver allocation system in the United States prioritizes sickest patients first at the expense of long-term graft survival. In a continuous distribution model, a measure of posttransplant survival will also be included. We aimed to use mathematical optimization to match donors and recipients based on quality to examine the potential impact of an allocation system designed to maximize long-term graft survival.

Methods.

Cox proportional hazard models using organ procurement and transplantation network data from 2008 to 2012 were used to place donors and waitlist candidates into 5 groups of increasing risk for graft loss (1—lowest to 5—highest). A mixed integer programming optimization model was then used to generate allocation rules that maximized graft survival at 5 and 8 y.

Results.

Allocation based on mathematical optimization improved 5-y survival by 7.5% (78.2% versus 70.7% in historic cohort) avoiding 2271 graft losses, and 8-y survival by 9% (71.8% versus 62.8%) avoiding 2725 graft losses. Long-term graft survival for recipients within a quality group is highly dependent on donor quality. All candidates in groups 1 and 2 and 43% of group 3 were transplanted, whereas none of the candidates in groups 4 and 5 were transplanted.

Conclusions.

Long-term graft survival can be improved using a model that allocates livers based on both donor and recipient quality, and the interaction between donor and recipient quality is an important predictor of graft survival. Considerations for incorporation into a continuous distribution model are discussed.

Clinical Analysis of Factors Affecting Hospital Mortality After Liver Transplant in Patients With High Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score

BACKGROUND

This study was undertaken to identify poor prognostic factors in patients with high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores.

METHODS

From September 2001 to December 2017, living donor liver transplant and deceased donor liver transplant were performed in 851 (84.4%) and 157 patients (15.6%), respectively, in our center. Eighty-one patients (8.0%) with MELD scores ≥ 35 were classified as patients with high MELD scores.

RESULTS

The overall survival rates in patients with high MELD scores were significantly worse than those in patients with low MELD scores (P = .005). However, no significant difference in survival was found between the 2 groups when in-hospital mortality was excluded. In-hospital mortality occurred in 18 patients (22.2%), and the main cause of death was sepsis (n = 14, 77.8%). On univariate analysis, the risk factors for in-hospital mortality were mean age (P = .028), mean MELD score (P = .045), intubation status (P < .001), culture positivity (P = .042), and encephalopathy grade 3 or 4 (P = .014). On multivariate analysis, age (P = .006), intubation status (P = .042), and culture positivity (P = .036) were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The main cause of in-hospital mortality was sepsis, and the risk factors for in-hospital mortality of patients with high MELD score were older age, preoperative intubation, and culture positivity. Special attention should be paid to the prevention and treatment of infection in the liver transplant of patient with high MELD scores.

MELD is MELD is MELD? Transplant center-level variation in waitlist mortality for candidates with the same biological MELD

Recently, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-based liver allocation in the United States has been questioned based on concerns that waitlist mortality for a given biologic MELD (bMELD), calculated using laboratory values alone, might be higher at certain centers in certain locations across the country. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the center-level variation in bMELD-predicted mortality risk. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data from January 2015 to December 2019, we modeled mortality risk in 33 260 adult, first-time waitlisted candidates from 120 centers using multilevel Poisson regression, adjusting for sex, and time-varying age and bMELD. We calculated a "MELD correction factor" using each center's random intercept and bMELD coefficient. A MELD correction factor of +1 means that center's candidates have a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk equivalent to 1 bMELD point. We found that the "MELD correction factor" median (IQR) was 0.03 (-0.47, 0.52), indicating almost no center-level variation. The number of centers with "MELD correction factors" within ±0.5 points, and between ±0.5-± 1, ±1.0-±1.5, and ±1.5-±2.0 points was 62, 41, 13, and 4, respectively. No centers had waitlisted candidates with a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk beyond ±2 bMELD points. Given that bMELD similarly predicts waitlist mortality at centers across the country, our results support continued MELD-based prioritization of waitlisted candidates irrespective of center.

Physical frailty in liver transplantation

In patients with cirrhosis, frailty represents a status of global physical dysfunction associated with a multiplicity of factors, including muscle wasting, undernutrition and malnutrition, and functional impairment. This condition is particularly prevalent among those with advanced cirrhosis, such as liver transplant (LT) candidates. Studies in this vulnerable population have demonstrated that its presence is independently predictive of adverse outcomes both pre- and post-transplantation, and thus that its incorporation into clinical practice could result in improved clinical decision-making, particularly regarding the identification of candidates for physical and nutritional interventions. There are, however, some limitations to its immediate incorporation into organ allocation prioritization models, including the wide heterogeneity of instruments used for measuring frailty, and particularly the lack of a single one suitable in all LT clinical scenarios (inpatient vs outpatient; pre- vs post-transplant). Finally, the data on the potential effects of frailty improvement on the diverse range of outcome measures are still preliminary.

The Precise Relationship Between Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Survival Without a Liver Transplant

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Scores from the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), which are used to prioritize candidates for deceased donor livers, are widely acknowledged to be negatively correlated with the 90-day survival rate without a liver transplant. However, inconsistent and outdated estimates of survival probabilities by MELD preclude useful applications of the MELD score.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Using data from all prevalent liver waitlist candidates from 2016 to 2019, we estimated 3-day, 7-day, 14-day, 30-day, and 90-day without-transplant survival probabilities (with confidence intervals) for each MELD score and status 1A. We used an adjusted Kaplan-Meier model to avoid unrealistic assumptions and multiple observations per person instead of just the observation at listing. We found that 90-day without-transplant survival has improved over the last decade, with survival rates increasing >10% (in absolute terms) for some MELD scores. We demonstrated that MELD correctly prioritizes candidates in terms of without-transplant survival probability but that status 1A candidates' short-term without-transplant survival is higher than that of MELD 40 candidates and lower than that of MELD 39 candidates. Our primary result is the updated survival functions themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

We calculated without-transplant survival probabilities for each MELD score (and status 1A). The survival function is an invaluable tool for many applications in liver transplantation: awarding of exception points, calculating the relative demand for deceased donor livers in different geographic areas, calibrating the pediatric end-stage liver disease score, and deciding whether to accept an offered liver.

Frailty and Sarcopenia in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

In patients with cirrhosis, sarcopenia is a critical reduction in skeletal muscle mass and frailty represents a status of global physical dysfunction caused by under nutrition, muscle wasting, and functional impairment. Both are prevalent conditions in liver transplant candidates and have shown to be independent predictors of adverse outcome. Evidence supports their incorporation into clinical practice both as a prognostic factor guiding clinical decision making and as a tool to identify candidates for physical and nutritional interventions. The wide heterogeneity of instruments used for sarcopenia and frailty measurement, the absence of a single suitable instrument for sarcopenia and frailty assessment in the outpatient versus inpatient acute-on-chronic clinical scenario, and the lack of strong evidence showing a beneficial effect of sarcopenia and frailty improvement on outcomes before and after transplantation are some of the questions that remain unanswered.

Racial, Gender, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving therapy; therefore, equitable distribution of this scarce resource is of paramount importance. We searched contemporary literature on racial, gender, and socioeconomic disparities across the LT care cascade in referral, waitlist practices, allocation, and post-LT care. We subsequently identified gaps in the literature and future research priorities. Studies found that racial and ethnic minorities (Black and Hispanic patients) have lower rates of LT referral, more advanced liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma at diagnosis, and are less likely to undergo living donor LT (LDLT). Gender-based disparities were observed in waitlist mortality and LT allocation. Women have lower LT rates after waitlisting, with size mismatch accounting for much of the disparity. Medicaid insurance has been associated with higher rates of chronic liver disease and poor waitlist outcomes. After LT, some studies found lower overall survival among Black compared with White recipients. Studies have also shown lower literacy and limited educational attainment were associated with increased posttransplant complications and lower use of digital technology. However, there are notable gaps in the literature on disparities in LT. Detailed population-based estimates of the advanced liver disease burden and LT referral and evaluation practices, including for LDLT, are lacking. Similarly, little is known about LT disparities worldwide. Evidence-based strategies to improve access to care and reduce disparities have not been comprehensively identified. Prospective registries and alternative "real-world" databases can provide more detailed information on disease burden and clinical practices. Modeling and simulation studies can identify ways to reduce gender disparities attributed to size or inaccurate estimation of renal function. Mixed-methods studies and clinical trials should be conducted to reduce care disparities across the transplant continuum.

The trials and tribulations of liver allocation

Allocation policies are necessary to ensure a fair distribution of a scarce resource. The goal of any liver transplant allocation policy is to achieve the best possible outcomes for the waiting list population, irrespective of the indication for transplant, whilst maximizing organ utilization. Organ allocation for liver transplantation has evolved from simple centre-based approaches driven by local issues, to complex, evidence-based algorithm prioritizing according to need. Despite the rapid evolution of allocation policies, there remain a number of challenges and new approaches are required to ensure transparency and equity on the decision-making process and the best possible outcomes for patients on the waiting list. New ways of modelling, together with novel outcome criteria, will be required to enable a dynamic adaptability of the allocation policies to the ever changing demographics of the donor population and the changing landscape of indications for transplantation.

Quantifying Sex-Based Disparities in Liver Allocation

Importance

Differences in local organ supply and demand have introduced geographic inequities in the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score-based liver allocation system, prompting national debate and patient-initiated lawsuits. No study to our knowledge has quantified the sex disparities in allocation associated with clinical vs geographic characteristics.

Objective

To estimate the proportion of sex disparity in wait list mortality and deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) associated with clinical and geographic characteristics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used adult (age ≥18 years) liver-only transplant listings reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network from June 18, 2013, through March 1, 2018.

Exposure

Liver transplant waiting list.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes included wait list mortality and DDLT. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed, and inverse odds ratio weighting was used to estimate the proportion of disparity across geographic location, MELD score, and candidate anthropometric and liver measurements.

Results

Among 81 357 adults wait-listed for liver transplant only, 36.1% were women (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [11.3] years; interquartile range, 49.0-63.0 years) and 63.9% were men (mean [SD] age, 55.7 [10.1] years; interquartile range, 51.0-63.0 years). Compared with men, women were 8.6% more likely to die while on the waiting list (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18) and were 14.4% less likely to receive a DDLT (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.88). In the geographic domain, organ procurement organization was the only variable that was significantly associated with increased disparity between female sex and wait list mortality (22.1% increase; aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.30); no measure of the geographic domain was associated with DDLT. Laboratory and allocation MELD scores were associated with increases in disparities in wait list mortality: 1.14 (95% CI, 1.09-1.19; 50.1% increase among women) and DDLT: 0.87 (95% CI, 0.86-0.88; 10.3% increase among women). Candidate anthropometric and liver measurements had the strongest association with disparities between men and women in wait list mortality (125.8% increase among women) and DDLT (49.0% increase among women).

Conclusions and Relevance

Our findings suggest that addressing geographic disparities alone may not mitigate sex-based disparities, which were associated with the inability of the MELD score to accurately estimate disease severity in women and to account for candidate anthropometric and liver measurements in this study.

The Effects of MELD-Based Liver Allocation on Patient Survival and Waiting List Mortality in a Country with a Low Donation Rate

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-based allocation system was implemented in Germany in 2006 in order to reduce waiting list mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate post-transplant results and waiting list mortality since the introduction of MELD-based allocation in our center and in Germany. Adult liver transplantation at the Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin was assessed retrospectively between 2005 and 2012. In addition, open access data from Eurotransplant (ET) and the German Organ Transplantation Foundation (DSO) were evaluated. In our department, 861 liver transplantations were performed from 2005 to 2012. The mean MELD score calculated with the laboratory values last transmitted to ET before organ offer (labMELD) at time of transplantation increased to 20.1 from 15.8 (Pearson’s R = 0.121, p < 0.001, confidence interval (CI) = 0.053–0.187). Simultaneously, the number of transplantations per year decreased from 139 in 2005 to 68 in 2012. In order to overcome this organ shortage the relative number of utilized liver donors in Germany has increased (85% versus 75% in non-German ET countries). Concomitantly, 5-year patient survival decreased from 79.9% in 2005 to 60.3% in 2012 (p = 0.048). At the same time, the ratio of waiting list mortality vs. active-listed patients nearly doubled in Germany (Spearman’s rho = 0.903, p < 0.001, CI = 0.634–0.977). In low-donation areas, MELD-based liver allocation may require reconsideration and inclusion of prognostic outcome factors.

Association of liver cirrhosis severity with anemia: does it matter?

Background

The etiology of anemia in liver disease is diverse and often multifactorial. Anemia is more severe in advanced stages of liver cirrhosis and can be a predictor of the severity of liver disease.

Methods

In this cross-sectional observational study, we included 181 cirrhotic patients with anemia owing to liver cirrhosis and its complications. The population was divided into 2 groups based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and the severity of anemia was assessed in the 2 groups. Similarly, hemoglobin levels were assessed in 3 groups based on the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) classification.

Results

There was a statistically significant correlation between CTP class and hemoglobin (P<0.001), with the lowest hemoglobin levels in CTP C patients. The correlation coefficient between hemoglobin and MELD score was -0.671 and was statistically significant, establishing that hemoglobin levels decrease with increasing severity of liver cirrhosis. Of 58 patients with macrocytosis, 45 (77.6%) had a MELD score of >12, whereas only 13 patients (22.4%) had a MELD score of <12. This difference was statistically significant (P<0.0001).

Conclusions

This study shows that hemoglobin levels decrease with increasing severity of liver disease; thus, this measure can be used in the initial assessment of patients to give a picture of the severity of the disease. A larger prospective trial is needed to establish the use of hemoglobin levels for assessing severity and predicting mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Long-term outcomes after liver transplantation in the Hispanic population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Racial/ethnic disparities in liver transplantation (LT) are well-recognized. Although Hispanics represent the largest and youngest minority group in the United States, limited data exist on long-term outcomes. We aimed to investigate long-term post-liver transplant outcomes in Hispanic patients and identify potential disparities compared to a baseline demographic of non-Hispanic white patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of first-time liver transplant recipients using the United Network for Organ Sharing database from 2002 to 2013, with follow-up through 2018. The primary outcomes of interest were overall patient and graft survival after LT.

RESULTS

45 767 patients underwent LT (85.0% non-Hispanic white, 15.0% Hispanic). Hispanics had lower socioeconomic status, higher prevalence of pretransplant comorbidities and more severe liver disease compared to non-Hispanic whites. Hispanics had similar patient (76.6% vs 75.6%; P = .12) and graft (71.7% vs 70.8%; P = .28) survival at 5 years and significantly better patient (62.9% vs 59.7%; P < .001) and graft (58.6% vs 55.6%; P = .002) survival at 10 years. In multivariable analysis, Hispanics had lower associated all-cause mortality (HR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.82-0.91; P < .001) and graft failure (HR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.85-0.93; P < .001) compared to non-Hispanic whites. In etiology-specific subanalysis, Hispanics transplanted for ALD, NASH and HCV had lower all-cause mortality compared to non-Hispanic whites.

CONCLUSIONS

Hispanics have similar or better long-term post-LT outcomes compared to non-Hispanic whites despite a worse pretransplant risk factor profile. Further research is needed to clarify if this survival advantage reflects uncaptured protective factors or more stringent transplant selection in the Hispanic population.

Deceased donor liver transplantation under the Korean model for end-stage liver disease score-based liver allocation system: 2-year allocation results at a high-volume transplantation center

Background

The Korean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score-based liver allocation system was started in June 2016 in Korea.

Methods

This study analyzed the detailed allocation results of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) during the first 2 years after the MELD score-based liver allocation system implementation at a high-volume liver transplantation (LT) center in Korea.

Results

This study included 174 patients with age above 12 years. The patient ABO blood groups were A (n=65, 37.4%), B (n=51, 29.3%), O (n=28, 16.1%), and AB (n=30, 17.2%). The LT types were primary LT in 141 patients (81.0%) and retransplantation in 33 (19.0%). The Korean Network for Organ Sharing status categories at LT were as follows: status 1 (n=11, 6.3%), status 2 (n=82, 47.1%), status 3 (n=63, 36.2%), and status 4 (n=18, 10.3%). The mean MELD score at LT and waiting period were 36.6±4.6 and 62.1±98.2 days in blood group A; 37.6±3.6 and 25.7±38.1 days in blood group B; 38.8±2.7 and 26.0±30.5 days in blood group O; and 34.8±5.5 and 68.4±110.5 days in blood group AB (P<0.001 and P=0.012), respectively. Patients with blood group O and AB had the highest and lowest mean MELD scores at LT allocation, respectively.

Conclusions

Serious deceased organ donor shortage resulted in very high MELD score cutoffs for DDLT allocation. Additionally, a significant inequality was observed in the possibility for DDLT according to blood group compatibility. Nationwide follow-up studies are necessary to precisely determine the allocation status of DDLT.

Analysis of the Liver Transplant Waiting List in Our Center

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is an important treatment for acute liver failure and end-stage liver disease. Due to the limited supply of livers, there are still thousands of candidates waiting for transplantation in Turkey. We aimed to analyze LT waiting list access by demographics and etiology, particularly the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which has been prioritized for LT in recent years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2011 and 2018, all patients listed for LT in our center were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic features, etiology of liver disease, waiting time, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, and survival data were recorded. Differences between the LT group and deceased patients on the waiting list were evaluated.

RESULTS

During this period, 266 patients were included in the LT waiting list. Only 119 patients (44.7%) underwent LT (men, 94; women, 25; mean age, 53 years), whereas 103 (38%) died (men, 60; women, 43; mean age, 53 years) in the waiting period. Seventeen patients were status 1A or 1B and of these, 7 patients died from fulminant hepatic failure. MELD score was significantly higher in deceased group (28 ± 7 vs 25 ± 6; P = .014). The frequency of HCC was significantly higher in LT group (29% vs 11%; P = .002). Overall survival of the patients in the waiting list with and without liver transplantation were 63% and 41%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

HCC is one of the leading etiologies that is considered for cadaveric LT from the waiting list in our center. These patients had slightly lower MELD scores compared to deceased patients with shorter waiting times. We recommend early referral and close monitoring of the patients who are LT candidates.

Use of rapid Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) increases for liver transplant registrant prioritization after MELD-Na and Share 35, an evaluation using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has been successfully used to prioritize patients on the United States liver transplant waiting list since its adoption in 2002. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)/Organ Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) allocation policy has evolved over the years, and notable recent changes include Share 35, inclusion of serum sodium in the MELD score, and a ‘delay and cap’ policy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. We explored the potential of a registrant’s change in 30-day MELD scores (ΔMELD₃₀) to improve allocation both before and after these policy changes. Current MELD and ΔMELD₃₀ were evaluated using cause-specific hazards models for waitlist dropout based on US liver transplant registrants added to the waitlist between 06/30/2003 and 6/30/2013. Two composite scores were constructed and then evaluated on UNOS data spanning the current policy era (01/02/2016 to 09/07/2018). Predictive accuracy was evaluated using the C-index for model discrimination and by comparing observed and predicted waitlist dropout probabilities for model calibration. After the change to MELD-Na, increased dropout associated with ΔMELD₃₀ jumps is no longer evident at MELD scores below 30. However, the adoption of Share 35 has potentially resulted in discrepancies in waitlist dropout for patients with sharp MELD increases at higher MELD scores. Use of the ΔMELD₃₀ to add additional points or serve as a potential tiebreaker for patients with rapid deterioration may extend the benefit of Share 35 to better include those in most critical need.

Shorter Height Is Associated With Lower Probability of Liver Transplantation in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The effect of height and sex on liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear.

METHODS

Using United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data, 14 844 HCC patients listed for LT from 2005 to 2015 were identified. Cumulative incidence of waitlist events (LT and dropout for death or too sick) were calculated and modeled using Fine and Gray competing risk regression.

RESULTS

Short (SWR), mid (MWR), and long (LWR) UNOS wait regions comprised 25%, 42%, and 33% of the cohort. Three-year cumulative incidence of LT was lower in shorter height patients (≤150, 151-165, and >185 cm; 70.8%, 76.7%, and 83.5%; P < 0.001) and women (78.2% versus 79.8%; P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, shorter height (≤150, 151-165 cm, hazard ratio [HR] versus >185 cm) was associated with lower probability of LT (0.81 and 0.89; P = 0.02) and greater dropout (HR 1.99 and 1.43; P < 0.001). Female sex was not associated with LT overall, but a significant sex and wait region interaction (P = 0.006) identified lower LT probability for women in MWR (HR versus men, 0.91; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite uniform HCC Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception across height and sex, shorter patients and females in MWR have lower probability of LT. Consideration should be given to awarding additional Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception points to these patients.

Outcomes and risk factors of postoperative hepatic dysfunction in patients undergoing acute type A aortic dissection surgery

Background

Postoperative hepatic dysfunction (HD) increases the morbidity and mortality risk after cardiac surgery; however, only a few studies have specifically focused on acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD) surgery. We explored the possible risk factors and outcomes of early postoperative HD in patients with AAAD undergoing surgery.

Methods

All patients who underwent AAAD surgery at our institution from April 2015 to April 2017 were retrospectively evaluated. Postoperative model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was used to define HD. Independent risk factors for HD were determined by multivariate logistic analysis.

Results

Two hundred fifteen patients with AAAD met the inclusion criteria. The incidence rate of early postoperative HD was 60.9%, and the rate of in-hospital mortality was 16.8%. Patients with a high postoperative MELD score had longer mechanical ventilation time, longer durations of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and higher in-hospital mortality. During the postoperative period, patients with AAAD complicated by HD needed continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), reintubation, tracheostomy, and blood transfusion more frequently. Aortic cross clamp (ACC) time [per 10 min higher; odds ratio (OR): 1.216, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.017-1.454, P=0.032], postoperative leucocytes (per 2×10⁹/L higher; OR: 1.161, 95% CI: 1.018-1.324, P=0.026), postoperative respiratory dysfunction (OR: 3.176, 95% CI: 1.293-7.803, P=0.012), and postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) (OR: 12.663, 95% CI: 1.432-111.998, P=0.022) were independent risk factors associated with HD in patients undergoing AAAD surgery.

Conclusions

Postoperative HD prolongs mechanical ventilation time and ICU stay, and is associated with increased in-hospital mortality among patients who undergo AAAD surgery. Several factors are associated with a high postoperative MELD score.

Effects of Share 35 Policy on Liver Transplantation Outcomes for Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis

BACKGROUND

To examine the temporal variation and outcomes of liver transplantation between pre- and post-Share 35 eras for patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed among 4380 patients with end-stage liver disease from the United Network for Organ Sharing database from 2009 to 2017 due to primary diagnosis of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or cryptogenic cirrhosis with body mass index greater than 30. Cox regressions were used to model the effect of Share 35 policy on patient and graft survival comparing the first 3 years of Share 35 policy to an equivalent time period before.

RESULTS

The number of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-related transplants increased from 232 (14.1%) in 2009 to 266 (20.5%) in 2017. In post-Share 35 era, average waitlist time and cold ischemic time decreased, while Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores increased with higher proportion of recipients having MELD ≥35. No significant difference in average length of hospitalization or survival was found after Share 35.

CONCLUSIONS

The Share 35 policy benefits patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis from reduced liver transplantation waiting time. It is also associated with comparable outcomes in 2 eras without increasing cold ischemic time or posttransplant length of hospitalization.

Development of a Korean Liver Allocation System using Model for End Stage Liver Disease Scores: A Nationwide, Multicenter study

The previous Korean liver allocation system was based on Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores, but increasing numbers of deceased donors created a pressing need to develop an equitable, objective allocation system based on model for end-stage liver disease scores (MELD scores). A nationwide, multicenter, retrospective cohort study of candidates registered for liver transplantation from January 2009 to December 2011 was conducted at 11 transplant centers. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to stratify MELD score ranges according to waitlist survival. Of the 2702 patients that registered for liver transplantation, 2248 chronic liver disease patients were eligible. CART analysis indicated several MELD scores significantly predicted waitlist survival. The 90-day waitlist survival rates of patients with MELD scores of 31-40, 21-30, and ≤20 were 16.2%, 64.1%, and 95.9%, respectively (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the 14-day waitlist survival rates of severely ill patients (MELD 31-40, n = 240) with MELD scores of 31-37 (n = 140) and 38-40 (n = 100) were 64% and 43.4%, respectively (P = 0.001). Among patients with MELD > 20, presence of HCC did not affect waitlist survival (P = 0.405). Considering the lack of donor organs and geographic disparities in Korea, we proposed the use of a national broader sharing of liver for the sickest patients (MELD ≥ 38) to reduce waitlist mortality. HCC patients with MELD ≤ 20 need additional MELD points to allow them equitable access to transplantation. Based on these results, the Korean Network for Organ Sharing implemented the MELD allocation system in 2016.

Defining a Liver Transplant Benefit Threshold for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium Score

OBJECTIVES

The benefits of transplant are shown as the difference in survival posttransplant versus that shown if the patient had remained on the wait list. Serum sodium was added to improve prediction. We sought to revisit the question of which Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score threshold corresponded to a predicted benefit of liver transplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on adult patients (≥ 18 years old) were obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry (date range of June 18, 2013 to December 2016). Exclusion criteria were individuals listed for multiple organs or liver retransplant, patients who eventually underwent living-donor liver transplant, and patients with MELD score < 12. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to determine a time-dependent covariate for undergoing transplant with either MELD or MELD-sodium scores to describe the variability in estimated transplant benefit within 6 months of listing.

RESULTS

Our study included 14 352 patients. There were 902 patients with MELD score of 39 to 40 (6.3%) and 931 patients with MELD-Na score of 39 to 40 (6.5%). Using the original MELD score, we found that 90% of the cohort could derive benefit from transplant compared with 83% when MELD-Na was used. We found that 13% of patients had a predicted transplant benefit when determined using either MELD or MELD-Na but not both. The threshold for transplant benefit was 16 and 17 using MELD and MELD-Na, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Transition to MELD-Na did not define a more precise range at which patients benefited from transplant, and a similar percentage of patients was expected to derive benefit. Future revisions of donor liver allocation may allow better discrimination of expected transplant benefits among candidates currently assigned a high priority for donor livers.

Presumed Consent: A Potential Tool for Countries Experiencing an Organ Donation Crisis

BACKGROUND

There is currently an inadequate supply of allografts to meet the number of transplant candidates worldwide. A number of controversial policies, including implementation of a presumed consent organ donation system, have been considered to rectify the organ donation crisis.

AIMS

A secondary retrospective data analysis aimed to assess the impact of switching to a presumed consent organ donation model on organ donation rates.

METHODS

Deceased organ donation rates were compared before and after countries adopted presumed consent.

RESULTS

Six countries met entry criteria. All six countries had an increase in liver donation rates, while 4 out of the six countries had an increase in kidney donation rates. The overall mean (± SD) liver donation rate was 3.23 (± 0.97) per million population (pmp) before the transition and 6.46 (± 1.81) pmp after the transition (p < 0.0001). The overall mean (± SD) kidney donation rate was 17.94 (± 3.34) pmp before the transition and 26.58 (± 4.23) pmp after the transition (p < 0.0001). The percentage increase in liver and kidney donation rates varied among countries, ranging from 28 to 1186%.

CONCLUSION

The transition from explicit to presumed consent was associated with a significant increase in liver donation rates in all countries that met our criteria, while the effect on kidney donation rates was partially realized. Although presumed consent alone is unlikely to explain the increase in donation rates, the adoption of such a policy may prove to be a worthwhile risk for countries experiencing consistently low organ donation rates.

Liver Allocation Policies in the USA: Past, Present, and the Future

Identifying the optimal allocation policy with regard to hepatocellular carcinoma has been a persistent and evolving challenge. The current criteria for LT for HCC endorsed by the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) are based on the Milan Criteria: a solitary tumor < 5 cm, or maximum of three tumors ≤ 3 cm each, without vascular invasion or evidence of extrahepatic spread. Contraindications to HCC exception points include: stage 1 HCC, ruptured HCC, extrahepatic HCC, and main portal or hepatic vein HCC invasion. Based upon projected waitlist dropout rates due to tumor growth, patients with HCC are assigned MELD standardized exception points. In addition to tumor size and number, AFP levels are an important predictor of recurrence of HCC following liver transplantation. Standardized exception points for HCC patients are not awarded to patients with AFP levels > 1000 ng/mL that do not decrease to < 500 ng/mL with treatment. Appeals for MELD exception points for patients with HCC vary widely between UNOS regions, with success of nonstandardized exception point appeals varying from 3.1 to 21% between regions. In an effort to make prioritization for HCC more consistent, a national liver review board (NLRB)is being convened that will focus on developing a national guidance for assessing common requests and addressing exception points, including for HCC.

Update on Liver Transplantation: What is New Recently?

Liver transplantation (LT) is an evolving area of medicine for the treatment of certain types of malignancies and acute and chronic liver failures. Since the topic is evolving, new literature is increasingly available. In recent years, with the emerging potent antiviral therapies, hepatitis C virus-infected patients have successful patient and graft survival outcomes. Even human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive patients previously contraindicated for organ transplantation are transplanted with comparable outcomes. With increasing demand for LT, the shortage of the donor pool became the rate limiting factor in this hopeful treatment. To overcome waitlist mortality and expand the donor pool, scoring systems have been modified and organs from HIV and/or hepatitis C infected donors are now accepted, under certain circumstances. The new literature also questions the 6-month alcohol abstinence rule for the transplantation of alcoholic liver disease (ALD), in light of early transplantation results from severe alcoholic hepatitis (SAH) trials. How to cite this article: Tasdogan BE, Akosman S, et al. Update on Liver Transplantation: What is New Recently? Euroasian J Hepatogastroenterol 2019;9(1):34-39.

Hypoalbuminemia is Associated With Significantly Higher Liver Transplant Waitlist Mortality and Lower Probability of Receiving Liver Transplant

GOALS

To evaluate the predictive value of hypoalbuminemia on liver transplant (LT) waitlist survival and probability of receiving LT among adults with end-stage liver disease (ESLD).

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence reports on the negative prognostic value of hypoalbuminemia among ESLD patients awaiting LT.

METHODS

Using 2003 to 2015 United Network for Organ Sharing data, we retrospectively evaluated the impact of mild-moderate (2.5 to 3.4 g/dL) and severe hypoalbuminemia (<2.5 g/dL) on waitlist survival and probability of receiving LT among US adults awaiting LT. Outcomes were stratified by liver disease etiology and presence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among 128,450 adults listed for LT, 27.1% had normal albumin (≥3.5 g/dL), 53.7% mild-moderate hypoalbuminemia (2.5 to 3.4 g/dL), and 19.2% severe hypoalbuminemia (<2.5 g/dL) at time of listing. Patients with severe hypoalbuminemia had significantly lower 1-year waitlist survival compared with those with normal albumin (80.4% vs. 95.2%; P<0.001). On multivariate regression, severity of hypoalbuminemia was associated with increasing waitlist mortality, even after correcting for model for end stage liver disease-sodium and HCC [albumin, 2.5 to 3.4 g/dL: hazard ratio (HR), 1.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.62-2.01; P<0.001; <2.5 g/dL: HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 2.20-2.76; P<0.001]. Patients with hypoalbuminemia had significantly lower probability of receiving LT compared with those with normal albumin (albumin <2.5 g/dL: HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.78-0.83; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ESLD patients with hypoalbuminemia have lower probability of LT despite significantly higher waitlist mortality compared with patients with normal albumin. If validated by further studies, incorporation of albumin into prognostication systems may improve the performance of US donor organ allocation systems.

Waitlist mortality and post-transplant survival in patients with cholestatic liver disease - Impact of changes in allocation policy

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the impact of Model of end-stage liver disease (MELD)-score introduction (MELDi) on waitlist mortality and post-liver transplant (LT) survival in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC).

METHODS

LT candidates with PSC or PBC listed between January 1983 and March 2016 were included and followed until December 2016. After MELDi in 2004, PBC patients were listed according to labMELD, PSC patients according to the highest MELD during active cholangitis (chMELD).

RESULTS

In total, 100 PBC and 76 PSC patients were included. Waitlist mortality in PBC was significantly higher than in PSC (16% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.031), whereas PSC patients were significantly more often withdrawn from the waitlist due to improved condition (3.0% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.017). Competing risks analysis identified MELDi (HR = 4.12) and PBC (HR = 2.95) as significant predictors of waitlist mortality. Yet, overall 10 y-patient survival increased after MELDi by 18.8% leading to a 1 y-, 5 y-, and 10 y-patient survival of 98.2%, 70.6% and 70.6% in PBC, and 83.3%, 83.3%, and 80.6% in PSC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PSC patients showed significantly lower waitlist mortality irrespective of MELDi, whereas in PBC waitlist mortality further increased after MELDi. Utility of MELD and chMELD did not impair post LT outcome.

Should Sarcopenia Increase Priority for Transplant or Is It a Contraindication?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss the current evidence regarding the impact of sarcopenia on patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation and to determine if its presence should be considered a criterion for expedited transplantation or a contraindication for transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sarcopenia is a negative predictor of survival in patients on a waiting list and after liver transplant. The gut-liver axis and the liver-muscle axis have been explored to understand the complex pathophysiology of sarcopenia. Sarcopenia is a frequent finding in patients with cirrhosis. The diagnosis is ideally based on cross-sectional image analysis (CT or MRI) and treatment consists of optimization of caloric and protein intake. To date, prioritizing tools for liver transplantation have not included nutrition or sarcopenia parameters. Patients with a low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) or MELD-Na score and sarcopenia would benefit from prioritization for transplant in order to reduce time on waiting list and therefore mortality.

Optimizing Live Kidney Donor Workup: A Decision Analysis Approach

BACKGROUND

Screening potential live kidney donors is an intense process for both candidates and the healthcare system. It is conventionally implemented using a standard generic protocol. Efficiencies in this process could potentially be achieved using personalized protocols that are optimized for a given candidate. Aim: To create personalized protocols (by age, sex, and paired exchange status) and evaluate them relative to the standard generic protocol.

METHODS

Two personalized protocols were created. One sequenced tests according to probability (high to low) of excluding a given candidate. The other sequenced tests according to the expected cost (low to high) per exclusion. Test costs and exclusion probabilities were extracted predominantly from Australian sources. These were integrated into a decision analysis incorporating Markov processes. This estimated the expected financial cost and expected number of tests performed to exclude an ineligible candidate in the standard generic and personalized protocols.

RESULTS

The standard generic protocol consistently ranked poorest in terms of expected costs and expected tests per exclusion across all ages, sexes, and paired exchange status. Compared with the most efficient personalized protocol, the standard generic protocol was on average A$1767.49 more expensive and required 3.53 more tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Personalized protocols enhance the ability of a kidney transplant unit to effectively exclude live kidney donor candidates more quickly and cost effectively compared with the conventional standard generic protocol.

Potentially inappropriate liver transplantation in the era of the "sickest first" policy - A search for the upper limits

Liver transplantation has emerged as a highly efficient treatment for a variety of acute and chronic liver diseases. However, organ shortage is becoming an increasing problem globally, limiting the applicability of liver transplantation. In addition, potential recipients are becoming sicker, thereby increasing the risk of losing the graft during transplantation or in the initial postoperative period after liver transplantation (three months). This trend is challenging the model for end-stage liver disease allocation system, where the sickest candidates are prioritised and no delisting criteria are given. The weighting of the deontological demand for "equity", trying to save every patient, regardless of the overall utility; and "efficiency", rooted in utilitarianism, trying to save as many patients as possible and increase the overall quality of life of patients facing the same problem, has to be reconsidered. In this article we are aiming to overcome the widespread concept of futility in liver transplantation, providing a definition of potentially inappropriate liver transplantation and giving guidance on situations where it is best not to proceed with liver transplantation, to decrease the mortality rate in the first three months after transplantation. We propose "absolute" and "relative" conditions, where early post-transplant mortality is highly probable, which are not usually captured in risk scores predicting post-transplant survival. Withholding liver transplantation for listed patients in cases where liver transplant is not deemed clearly futile, but is potentially inappropriate, is a far-reaching decision. Until now, this decision had to be discussed extensively on an individual basis, applying explicit communication and conflict resolution processes, since the model for end-stage liver disease score and most international allocation systems do not include explicit delisting criteria to support a fair delisting process. More work is needed to better identify cases where transplantation is potentially inappropriate and to integrate and discuss these delisting criteria in allocation systems, following a societal debate on what we owe to all liver transplant candidates.

Ethics of Liver Transplantation: The Role of the Anesthesiologist

Anesthesiologists have clearly established their place in the history of medical ethics. Our involvement goes back to 1966 when Henri Beecher published his landmark paper on research and informed consent. Participation in the ethics of transplantation is no less important than our previous work. Organ transplant has been life saving for many but also has given rise to many misunderstandings not just from the public but also among our own colleagues. These include methods of allocation and donation, the role that affluence may play in receiving an organ, the definition of death and donation after circulatory death. As perioperative physicians and important members of the transplant team, anesthesiologists are expected to participate in all aspects of care including ethical judgments. This article discusses some of the issues that seem to cause the most confusion and angst for those of us involved in both liver transplantation and in the procurement of organs. It will discuss the definition of death, donation after circulatory death, the anesthesiologists' role on the selection committee, living donor liver transplantation, and transplantation of patients with alcohol-related liver disease.