Evaluating Outcomes Related to Donor and Recipient Metabolic Environment: Macrosteatotic Allografts and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis

Overcoming the hurdles of steatotic grafts in liver transplantation: Insights into survival and prognostic factors

With increasing metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, the use of steatotic grafts in liver transplantation (LT) and their impact on postoperative graft survival (GS) needs further exploration. Analyzing adult LT recipient data (2002-2022) from the United Network for Organ Sharing database, outcomes of LT using steatotic (≥30% macrosteatosis) and nonsteatotic donor livers, donors after circulatory death, and standard-risk older donors (age 45-50) were compared. GS predictors were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Of the 35,345 LT donors, 8.9% (3,155) were fatty livers. The initial 30-day postoperative period revealed significant challenges with fatty livers, demonstrating inferior GS. However, the GS discrepancy between fatty and nonfatty livers subsided over time ( p = 0.10 at 5 y). Long-term GS outcomes showed comparable or even superior results in fatty livers relative to nonsteatotic livers, conditional on surviving the initial 90 postoperative days ( p = 0.90 at 1 y) or 1 year ( p = 0.03 at 5 y). In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the high body surface area (BSA) ratio (≥1.1) (HR 1.42, p = 0.02), calculated as donor BSA divided by recipient BSA, long cold ischemic time (≥6.5 h) (HR 1.72, p < 0.01), and recipient medical condition (intensive care unit hospitalization) (HR 2.53, p < 0.01) emerged as significant adverse prognostic factors. Young (<40 y) fatty donors showed a high BSA ratio, diabetes, and intensive care unit hospitalization as significant indicators of a worse prognosis ( p < 0.01). Our study emphasizes the initial postoperative 30-day survival challenge in LT using fatty livers. However, with careful donor-recipient matching, for example, avoiding the use of steatotic donors with long cold ischemic time and high BSA ratios for recipients in the intensive care unit, it is possible to enhance immediate GS, and in a longer time, outcomes comparable to those using nonfatty livers, donors after circulatory death livers, or standard-risk older donors can be anticipated. These novel insights into decision-making criteria for steatotic liver use provide invaluable guidance for clinicians.

Predictors of patient survival following liver transplant in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is the second-leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide and is projected to become the leading indication. Our study aimed to determine clinical variables that predict post-LT survival in NASH.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. On June 18, 2020 and April 28, 2022, Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. No date limits were applied. Inclusion criteria specified the type of study and our study's population/comparison and outcome/timepoints. Pediatric, animal, retransplantation-only, and studies classifying cryptogenic cirrhosis patients with body mass index (BMI) <30 as NASH were excluded. Studies with duplicate cohorts and missing information were excluded from the meta-analysis. Studies were appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. This study was preregistered in PROSPERO (CRD42020196915).

FINDINGS

Out of 8583 studies identified, 25 studies were included in the systematic review, while 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Our quantitative review suggested that the following variables were predictive of post-LT NASH patient survival: recipient age, functional status, pre-LT hepatoma, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, diabetes mellitus (DM), pre-LT dialysis, hepatic encephalopathy, portal vein thrombosis, hospitalization/ICU at LT, and year of LT. Predictors of graft survival included recipient age, BMI, pre-LT dialysis, and DM. Our pooled meta-analyses included five predictors of patient survival. Increased patient mortality was associated with older recipient age (HR=2·07, 95%CI: 1·71-2·50, I²=0, τ²=0, p=0·40) and pretransplant DM (HR=1·18, 95%CI: 1·08-1·28, I²=0, τ²=0, p=0·76).

INTERPRETATION

Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesise predictive variables of mortality in LT NASH patients. Clinically, this might help to identify modifiable risk factors that can be optimized in the post-transplant setting to improve patient outcomes and optimises decision making in the resource-limited LT setting.

FUNDING

Toronto General and Western Hospital Foundation.