Living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure: a 10-year experience in a single center

Living donor liver transplant for Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis: considerations and global perspectives

INTRODUCTION

In carefully selected individuals, outcomes of early deceased donor liver transplantation (<6 months of sobriety) for severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (AAH) are similar to transplant for other indications. There is increasing interest in the expansion of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) for AAH.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was conducted in PubMed using search terms 'alcoholic hepatitis,' 'alcohol-associated hepatitis,' 'acute liver failure' and 'living donor liver transplant' between 1995 and 2025. Additional data sources were the International Registry in Organ Donation and Transplantation, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. We summarize the global burden of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), and the emergence of early LT for AAH. Donor- and recipient-specific factors are explored, as well as societal considerations including equitable allocation and health system financial impact. Finally, current LT practices for ALD by region are reviewed, with a focus on readiness for expansion of LDLT for AAH.

EXPERT OPINION

Use of LDLT for AAH is infrequent, but countries with experience in LT for AAH and/or LDLT for acute liver failure are most poised to expand to LDLT for AAH. Progress is needed in assessing risk of return to harmful drinking and improving management of alcohol use disorder.

Liver transplantation for acute liver failure and acute-on-chronic liver failure

Acute liver failure (ALF) and acute-on-chronic liver (ACLF) are distinct phenotypes of liver failure and, thus, need to be compared and contrasted for appropriate management. There has been a significant improvement in the outcomes of these patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). Survival post-LT for ALF and ACLF ranges between 90% and 95% and 80% and 90% at 1 year, futility criteria have been described in both ALF and ACLF where organ failures define survival. Plasma exchange and continuous renal replacement therapy may serve as bridging therapies. Identifying the futility of LT is as necessary as the utility of LT in patients with ALF and ACLF. The role of regenerative therapies such as granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in ACLF and hepatocyte and xenotransplantation in both conditions remains uncertain. Measures to increase the donor pool through increasing deceased donor transplants in Asian countries, living donations in Western countries, auxiliary liver transplants, and ABO-incompatible liver transplants are necessary to improve the survival of these patients. In this review, we discuss the similarities and differences in clinical characteristics and the timing and outcomes of LT for ALF and ACLF, briefly highlighting the role of bridging therapies and providing an overview of recent advances in the management of ALF and ACLF.

Clinical significance and outcomes of adult living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure: a retrospective cohort study based on 15-year single-center experience

Purpose

This study aimed to describe adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for acute liver failure and evaluate its clinical significance by comparing its surgical and survival outcomes with those of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 267 consecutive patients (161 LDLT recipients and 106 DDLT recipients) aged 18 years or older who underwent liver transplantation between January 2006 and December 2020.

Results

The mean periods from hepatic encephalopathy to liver transplantation were 5.85 days and 8.35 days for LDLT and DDLT, respectively (P = 0.091). Among these patients, 121 (45.3%) had grade III or IV hepatic encephalopathy (living, 34.8% vs. deceased, 61.3%; P < 0.001), and 38 (14.2%) had brain edema (living, 16.1% vs. deceased, 11.3%; P = 0.269) before liver transplantation. There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (living, 11.8% vs. deceased, 15.1%; P = 0.435), 10-year overall survival (living, 90.8% vs. deceased, 84.0%; P = 0.096), and graft survival (living, 83.5% vs. deceased, 71.3%; P = 0.051). However, postoperatively, the mean intensive care unit stay was shorter in the LDLT group (5.0 days vs. 9.5 days, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was associated with vasopressor use (odds ratio [OR], 3.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-7.96; P = 0.005) and brain edema (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.16-6.52; P = 0.022) of recipient at the time of transplantation. However, LDLT (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.59-2.66; P = 0.553) was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

LDLT is feasible for acute liver failure when organs from deceased donors are not available.

Overview of acute liver failure in India

Acute liver failure (ALF) is an infrequent, but serious complication subsequent to severe acute liver injury (sALI) due to various hepatotoxic agents such as hepatotropic virus(es) and drugs such as anti-tubercular medications, paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antibiotics and anti-cancer and anti-epileptic therapy and due to metabolic and autoimmune disease flares. ALF after sALI presents with encephalopathy associated with prolonged international normalized ratio (INR). Mortality in ALF is high and ranges between 50% and 80%. Due to severe liver damage, multiple sequels consequent to hepatic dysfunction result in complications such as hyperammonemia that culminates in encephalopathy associated with cerebral edema; innate immune paralysis resulting in increased frequency of infections and endotoxemia causing decrease in systemic vascular resistance (SVR) and tissue hypoperfusion and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) released from damaged hepatic parenchyma inducing pro-inflammatory cytokine storm, which may cause other organ dysfunctions. Certain etiologies such as hepatitis E virus and hepatitis A virus-related ALF or paracetamol-ALF (hyper-acute presentation) have better survival than remaining causes. In addition, if etiology-specific treatment (antivirals for ALF related to hepatitis B virus (HBV) or Herpes simplex virus (HSV) or N-acetylcysteine for paracetamol) is available, then the outcome with treatment is better. About half of the patients can be salvaged with medical therapy. All patients need intensive care and organ support to provide time for the liver to regenerate. Various prognostic models to predict high probability of mortality have been described, which should be used to select patient early during the disease for liver transplantation, which is associated with high long-term survival in these sick patients. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) recommends the ALF-Early Dynamic (ALFED) model as a preferred prognostic model in the Indian scenario, where hepatitis viruses are a dominant etiology of ALF and occur on a naïve liver with good regenerative capacity.

Comparison of Two Donor Liver Procurement Methods for Treatment of Pediatric Acute Liver Failure

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the difference and efficacy of two donor liver procurement methods for treatment of pediatric acute liver failure (PALF) by living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

A total of 17 patients (12 men, 5 women) with PALF who underwent LDLT in our hospital between October 2016 and October 2020, and prognostic efficacy of donors and recipients using two donor liver procurement methods were analyzed.

RESULTS

The donors and recipients were both divided into laparoscopic (7 cases) and open (10 cases) donor liver procurement groups. In the recipients, two deaths occurred in the laparoscopic group and one in the open group, and there were three postoperative complications in the laparoscopic group and six in the open group. The cumulative 1-year and 3-year survival rates in the laparoscopic group and the open group were 80.0% and 85.7% separately. There was no difference in the postoperative survival and complications rates between the two groups. In the donors, the operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and blood loss of the laparoscopic group was significantly reduced compared with the open group (P ≤ 0.01). No death or serious complication occurred in either donor group.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic donor liver procurement is worth recommending than open donor liver procurement for treatment of PALF combined with LDLT in qualified transplant centers.

Delta MELD as a predictor of early outcome in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

An increased post-operative mortality risk has been reported among patients who undergo living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores. In this study, we investigated the effect of MELD score reduction on post-operative outcomes in patients with a high MELD (≥20) score by pre-transplant management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 386 LDLT cases, and patients were divided into low-MELD (<20, n=293) vs. high-MELD (≥20, n=93) groups according to their MELD score at the time of index hospitalization. Patients in the high-MELD group were managed specifically according to a treatment algorithm in an effort to decrease the MELD score. Patients in the high-MELD group were further divided into 2 subgroups: (1) responders (n=34) to pre-transplant treatment with subsequent reduction of the MELD score by a minimum of 1 point vs. (2) non-responders (n=59), whose MELD score remained unchanged or further increased on the day of LDLT. Responders vs. non-responders were compared according to etiology, demographics, and survival.

Approach to the patient with acute severe autoimmune hepatitis

Autoimmune hepatitis is associated with varied clinical presentations and natural history, as well as somewhat unpredictable treatment responses. Understanding how to stratify patients who require further escalation of therapy will help clinicians manage these patients. The presentation of acute severe autoimmune hepatitis (AS-AIH) is relatively uncommon, although its prevalence is potentially greater than currently perceived. Previous studies consist of small retrospective single-centre series and are not directly comparable due to the diversity of presentations, disease definitions and non-standardised treatment regimens. We define AS-AIH as those who present acutely with AIH and are icteric with an international normalised ratio ≥1.5 and no evidence of hepatic encephalopathy. Those with hepatic encephalopathy should be defined as having AS-AIH with acute liver failure. In this review, we provide a structured practical approach for diagnosing and managing this unique group of patients.

Indian National Association for the Study of Liver Consensus Statement on Acute Liver Failure (Part-2): Management of Acute Liver Failure

Acute liver failure (ALF) is not an uncommon complication of a common disease such as acute hepatitis. Viral hepatitis followed by antituberculosis drug-induced hepatotoxicity are the commonest causes of ALF in India. Clinically, such patients present with appearance of jaundice, encephalopathy, and coagulopathy. Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and cerebral edema are central and most important clinical event in the course of ALF, followed by superadded infections, and determine the outcome in these patients. The pathogenesis of encephalopathy and cerebral edema in ALF is unique and multifactorial. Ammonia plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis, and several therapies aim to correct this abnormality. The role of newer ammonia-lowering agents is still evolving. These patients are best managed at a tertiary care hospital with facility for liver transplantation (LT). Aggressive intensive medical management has been documented to salvage a substantial proportion of patients. In those with poor prognostic factors, LT is the only effective therapy that has been shown to improve survival. However, recognizing suitable patients with poor prognosis has remained a challenge. Close monitoring, early identification and treatment of complications, and couseling for transplant form the first-line approach to manage such patients. Recent research shows that use of dynamic prognostic models is better for selecting patients undergoing liver transplantation and timely transplant can save life of patients with ALF with poor prognostic factors.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Acute Liver Failure: Donor Safety and Recipient Outcome

In countries where deceased organ donation is sparse, emergency living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the only lifesaving option in select patients with acute liver failure (ALF). The aim of the current study is living liver donor safety and recipient outcomes following LDLT for ALF. A total of 410 patients underwent LDLT between March 2011 and February 2018, out of which 61 (14.9%) were for ALF. All satisfied the King's College criteria (KCC). Median admission to transplant time was 48 hours (range, 24-80.5 hours), and median living donor evaluation time was 18 hours (14-20 hours). Median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was 37 (32-40) with more than two-thirds having grade 3 or 4 encephalopathy and 70% being on mechanical ventilation. The most common etiology was viral (37%). Median jaundice-to-encephalopathy time was 15 (9-29) days. Preoperative culture was positive in 47.5%. There was no difference in the complication rate among emergency and elective living liver donors (13.1% versus 21.2%; P = 0.19). There was no donor mortality. For patients who met the KCC but did not undergo LT, survival was 22.8% (29/127). The 5-year post-LT actuarial survival was 65.57% with a median follow-up of 35 months. On multivariate analysis, postoperative worsening of cerebral edema (CE; hazard ratio [HR], 2.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-6.31), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS; HR, 16.7; 95% CI, 2.05-136.7), preoperative culture positivity (HR, 6.54; 95% CI, 2.24-19.07), and a longer anhepatic phase duration (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02) predicted poor outcomes. In conclusion, emergency LDLT is lifesaving in selected patients with ALF. Outcomes of emergency living liver donation were comparable to that of elective donors. Postoperative worsening of CE, preoperative SIRS, and sepsis predicted outcome after LDLT for ALF.

Good outcome of living donor liver transplantation in drug-induced acute liver failure: A single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Drug-induced acute liver failure (ALF) is associated with high mortality. There is limited literature on results of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted at a tertiary care center in North India. All patients who received LDLT for drug-induced ALF were included. The data are shown as median (IQR).

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients (15 females and three males), aged 34 (25-45) years, underwent LDLT for drug-induced liver injury (DILI)-related ALF. Etiology of ALF was antitubercular medications (n=14), orlistat (n=1), flutamide (n=1), and complementary alternative medications (n=2). The baseline parameters were as following: bilirubin 17.7 (16.3-23.8) mg/dL, INR 3.3 (2.5-4.0), jaundice encephalopathy interval 6 (3-17.5) days, arterial ammonia 109 μmol/L (73-215), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) 24 (18-33), grade of encephalopathy 2 (1-4), which progressed to grade 3 (3-4) before transplantation. All patients underwent right lobe LDLT; hospital stay was 17 (13-22) days, and ICU stay was 5 (5-7) days. Two patients died in the first month after liver transplantation due to sepsis and multi-organ failure; the rest of the patients are alive and doing well at a follow-up of 50 (4-82 months).

CONCLUSION

Good outcomes can be obtained by LDLT for drug-induced ALF.

Prognostic Factors Predicting Poor Outcome in Living-Donor Liver Transplantation for Fulminant Hepatic Failure

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been accepted as feasible treatment for fulminant hepatic failure (FHF), although it has generated several debatable issues. In this study, we investigated the prognostic factors predicting fatal outcome after LDLT for FHF.

METHODS

From April 1999 to April 2011, 60 patients underwent LT for acute liver failure, including 42 patients for FHF at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. Among 42 patients, 30 patients underwent LDLT for FHF, and the database of these patients was analyzed retrospectively to investigate the prognostic factors after LDLT for FHF.

RESULTS

Among 30 patients, 7 patients (23%) died during the in-hospital period within 6 months, and 23 patients (77%) survived until recently. In univariate analyses, donor age (>35 years), graft volume (GV)/standard liver volume (SLV) (<50%), cold ischemic time (>120 minutes), hepatic encephalopathy (grade IV), hepato-renal syndrome (HRS), and history of ventilator care were associated with fatal outcome after LDLT for FHF. In multivariate analyses, HRS, GV/SLV (<50%), and donor age (>35 years) were significantly associated with fatal outcome. Although the statistical significance was not shown in this analysis (P = .059), hepatic encephalopathy grade IV also appears to be a risk factor predicting fatal outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival of patients with FHF undergoing LDLT was comparable to that in published data. In this study, HRS, GV/SLV <50%, and donor age >35 years are the independent poor prognostic factors.

Outcome comparison of liver transplantation for hepatitis A-related versus hepatitis B-related acute liver failure in adult recipients

Hepatitis A virus (HAV) can cause acute liver failure (ALF). This study compares outcomes between liver transplantation (LT) for HAV-related ALF (HAV-ALF) and LT for hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related ALF (HBV-ALF). Of 3616 adult LTs performed between January 2005 and December 2014, we performed LT for HAV-ALF recipients (n = 29) and LT for HBV-ALF recipients (n = 34). HAV-ALF group included 18 males and 11 females with mean age of 33.1 years. Graft survival rates in HAV-ALF and HBV-ALF were 65.5% and 88.0% (1 year) and 65.5% and 84.0% (5 years) (P = .048). Patient survival rates in HAV-ALF and HBV-ALF were 69.0% and 88.0% (1 year) and 69.0% and 84.0% (5 years) (P = .09). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that acute pancreatitis and HAV recurrence were independent risk factors of graft and patient survival. Post-transplant outcome was poorer in patients with HAV-ALF than in those with HBV-ALF. This weakens LT's appropriateness in HAV-ALF patients with pancreatitis. HAV recurrence after LT for HAV-ALF is common and often fatal; thus, HAV recurrence should be monitored vigilantly, beginning early post-transplant.

The International Liver Transplantation Society Living Donor Liver Transplant Recipient Guideline

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been increasingly embraced around the world as an important strategy to address the shortage of deceased donor livers. The aim of this guideline, approved by the International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS), is to provide a collection of expert opinions, consensus, and best practices surrounding LDLT. Recommendations were developed from an analysis of the National Library of Medicine living donor transplantation indexed literature using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Writing was guided by the ILTS Policy on the Development and Use of Practice Guidelines (www.ilts.org). Intended for use by physicians, these recommendations support specific approaches to the diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventive aspects of care of living donor liver transplant recipients.

Compared to cadaveric liver transplantation, live donor LT (LDLT) is challenged by ethical, medical and surgical considerations, many of which are still unresolved. The aim of this guideline is to provide a collection of expert opinions, consensus, and best practices surrounding LDLT.

Galectin‑9 ameliorates fulminant liver injury

Fulminant hepatitis is a severe liver disease resulting in hepatocyte necrosis. Galectin-9 (Gal-9) is a tandem-repeat-type galectin that has been evaluated as a potential therapeutic agent for various diseases that regulate the host immune system. Concanavalin A (ConA) injection into mice results in serious, immune-mediated liver injury similar to human viral, autoimmune and fulminant hepatitis. The present study investigated the effects of Gal-9 treatment on fulminant hepatitis in vivo and the effect on the expression of microRNAs (miRNAs), in order to identify specific miRNAs associated with the immune effects of Gal-9. A ConA-induced mouse hepatitis model was used to investigate the effects of Gal-9 treatment on overall survival rates, liver enzymes, histopathology and miRNA expression levels. Histological analyses, TUNEL assay, immunohistochemistry and miRNA expression characterization, were used to investigate the degree of necrosis, fibrosis, apoptosis and infiltration of neutrophils and macrophages. Overall survival rates following ConA administration were significantly higher in Gal-9-treated mice compared with control mice treated with ConA + PBS. Histological examination revealed that Gal-9 attenuated hepatocellular damage, reduced local neutrophil infiltration and prevented the local accumulation of macrophages and liver cell apoptosis in ConA-treated mice. In addition, various miRNAs induced by Gal-9 may contribute to its anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory and pro-proliferative effects on hepatocytes. The results of the present study demonstrate that Gal-9 may be a candidate therapeutic target for the treatment of fulminant hepatitis.

Liver transplantation for acute liver failure

Before liver transplantation became widely applicable as a treatment option, the mortality rate for acute liver failure was as high as 85%. Today, acute liver failure is a relatively common transplant indication in some settings, but the results of liver transplantation in this context appear to be worse than those for chronic forms of liver disease. In this review, we discuss the indications and contraindications for urgent liver transplantation. In particular, we consider the roles of auxiliary, ABO-incompatible, and urgent living donor liver transplantation and address the management of a «status 1» patient with total hepatectomy and portocaval shunt for toxic liver syndrome.

The changes in treatment strategies in ABOi living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure

INTRODUCTION

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using ABO-incompatible (ABOi) graft for acute liver failure (ALF) is a developing treatment modality.

METHODS

We reviewed the changes in our treatment strategies in applying ABOi LDLT for FH over our fourteen years of experience.

RESULTS

Five patients with ALF received LDLT in adults using ABOi grafts, with different but gradually renewed protocols. The etiologies for acute liver failure included autoimmune hepatitis (n=3) and unknown (n=2). The desensitization protocol for ABOi barrier included Case #1; local infusion (portal vein)+plasma exchange (PE), Case #2; local infusion (hepatic artery)+rituximab+PE, Case #3 and #4; rituximab+PE, and Case #5; rituximab+PE under high-flow continuous hemodiafiltration. Local infusion was abandoned since Case #3, because Case #1 had portal vein thrombosis resulting in graft necrosis and Case #2 had hepatic artery dissection. The patients (Case #2 and #3), who received rituximab within 7 days before LDLT, experienced antibody-mediated rejection. Thus, the most recent protocol for ABOi-LDLT is that rituximab is given 2 weeks before LDLT, followed by high-flow continuous hemodiafiltration to obstacle hepatic encephalopathy until LDLT. The four patients except Case #1 are doing well with good graft function over 3.8±3.7 years.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab-based ABOi-LDLT, most-recently under high-flow hemodiafiltration for treating encephalopathy, is a feasible option for applying LDLT for ALF.

Auxiliary partial liver transplantation for acute liver failure using "high risk" grafts: Case report

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a reversible disorder that is associated with an abrupt loss of hepatic mass, rapidly progressive encephalopathy and devastating complications. Despite its high mortality, an emergency liver transplantation nowadays forms an integral part in ALF management and has substantially improved the outcomes of ALF. Here, we report the case of a 32-year-old female patient who was admitted with grade IV hepatic encephalopathy (coma) following drug-induced ALF. We performed an emergency auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplantation with a “high risk” graft (liver macrovesicular steatosis approximately 40%) from a living donor. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 57 with normal liver function. Weaning from immunosuppression was achieved 9 mo after transplantation. A follow-up using CT scan showed a remarkable increase in native liver volume and gradual loss of the graft. More than 6 years after the transplantation, the female now has a 4-year-old child and has returned to work full-time without any neurological sequelae.

Liver Transplant for Fulminant Hepatic Failure: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Acute liver failure is a life-threatening condition with sudden onset liver injury, decreased liver functions, hepatic encephalopathy, and coagulopathy in patients without preexisting liver disease. In this study, we sought to evaluate the results of liver transplant as a treatment for acute liver failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between November 1988 and March 2015, we performed 482 liver transplants in 471 patients. We performed 36 liver transplants in 35 patients because of acute liver failure. Only 5 of these were from deceased donors. Thirty of those 34 patients were pediatric (85%) and 5 were adults (15%).

RESULTS

Five patients died (4 in early postoperative period and 1 during the 18th month of living-donor liver transplant). We diagnosed 11 acute rejections (32%); 6 biliary leaks (17%); 6 intraabdominal hemorrhage (17%); 5 hepatic arterial thromboses (15%), and 1 venous complication (3%) during the early postoperative period. We have no morbidity or mortality in living-donor liver transplants.

CONCLUSIONS

Living-donor liver transplants are an efficient and successful treatment for acute liver failure patients. In our center, we mostly consider and prefer living-donor liver transplants to deceased-donor liver transplant because of the paucity of organ donation, especially for pediatric patients. Considering acceptable postoperative complications, living-donor liver transplant is a lifesaving treatment for acute liver failure.

Live donor liver transplantation: a valid alternative for critically ill patients suffering from acute liver failure

We report the outcome of live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients suffering from acute liver failure (ALF). From 2006 to 2013, all patients with ALF who received a LDLT (n = 7) at our institution were compared to all ALF patients receiving a deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT = 26). Groups were comparable regarding pretransplant ICU stay (DDLT: 1 [0-7] vs. LDLT: 1 days [0-10]; p = 0.38), mechanical ventilation support (DDLT: 69% vs. LDLT: 57%; p = 0.66), inotropic drug requirement (DDLT: 27% vs. LDLT: 43%; p = 0.64) and dialysis (DDLT: 2 vs. LDLT: 0 patients; p = 1). Median evaluation time for live donors was 24 h (18-72 h). LDLT versus DDLT had similar incidence of overall postoperative complications (31% vs. 43%; p = 0.66). No difference was detected between LDLT and DDLT patients regarding 1- (DDLT: 92% vs. LDLT: 86%), 3- (DDLT: 92% vs. LDLT: 86%), and 5- (DDLT: 92% vs. LDLT: 86%) year graft and patient survival (p = 0.63). No severe donor complication (Dindo-Clavien ≥3 b) occurred after live liver donation. ALF is a severe disease with high mortality on liver transplant waiting lists worldwide. Therefore, LDLT is an attractive option since live donor work-up can be expedited and liver transplantation can be performed within 24 h with excellent short- and long-term outcomes.

Application of postoperative Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scoring system for evaluating liver graft function after living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has been validated to predict the mortality rate of patients with various chronic liver diseases on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT). The aim of this study was to assess the value of the postoperative MELD scoring system as an early postoperative predictor of outcome in patients undergoing living donor LT (LDLT).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 217 adult-to-adult LDLT patients was performed. The values of the MELD score on various postoperative days (PODs) as predictors of graft loss within 6 months after LDLT were examined by calculating the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves. The 6-months graft survival rates were compared between patients with (n = 22) and without (n = 195) graft loss. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with mortality.

RESULTS

The MELD score on POD2 was a predictor of graft loss, with an AUROC c-statistic of 0.779, a specificity of 79.5%, and a sensitivity of 68.2% at optimal cutoff, whereas the preoperative MELD score c-statistic was 0.605 with 44.6% sensitivity. Multivariate analyses for postoperative mortality revealed MELD-POD2 ≥19 (odds ratio, 5.601; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.395-4.508; P = .0009) as an independent predictor of short-term graft loss following LDLT, in addition to preoperative hospitalization status. Later MELD POD scores were also predictive of graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The early postoperative MELD scoring system is feasible as an index for prediction of postoperative mortality following LDLT.

Indication for liver transplantation in young patients with small intestinal NETs is rare?

BACKGROUND

A majority of patients with small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (SI-NETs) present with or develop liver metastases (LM). A number of treatments for LM are used clinically, including liver transplantation (LTx). Indications for LTx are under debate; young age(<65 years), absence of extrahepatic disease, resected primary tumor and limited extent of LM have been suggested as inclusion criteria for LTx with the aim to optimize outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From our series of 672 patients with SI-NET treated at the University Hospital in Uppsala between 1985 and 2012, we identified 78 patients according to the following criteria: <65 years of age, locoregional surgery (LRS) of the primary tumor and mesenteric metastases successfully performed, LM present but no extrahepatic disease. Baseline was chosen as the first date the following points were met: First visit to our center,LRS performed, LM present. The patients underwent treatment according to the standard clinical protocols at our center, and during this time period we did not perform or refer any SI-NET patients for LTx. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed in three different groups based on hypothetical criteria for LTx.

RESULTS

Five-year overall survival rates for patients <65 years (n = 78) and <55 years (n = 36) of age were 84 ± 8 and 92 ± 9 %, respectively. For patients fulfilling the Milan criteria (n = 33) the 5-year survival was 97 ± 6 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Most young patients (<65 years) with SINET and LM have a favorable survival with standardized multimodality treatment. Indeed, most survival figures reported after LTx of NET do not surpass these figures.

Section 12. Living donor liver transplantation for patients with high model for end-stage liver disease scores and acute liver failure

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with high model for end-stage liver disease score and acute liver failure patients have little or not gained any substantial following among Western centers because of the "donor high risk-low recipient benefit scenario" that puts the donor at a significant risk against the survival odds for a recipient who is receiving a partial graft and considered marginal by Western standards. In most Asian countries, there is sometimes no other source of live graft but a willing live liver donor. There are individual Asian center reports that conclude that LDLT has comparable outcome to deceased donor liver transplant. However, the outcomes of a large number of patients after undergoing adult LDLT for high model for end-stage liver disease scores and acute liver failure at a single center have not been investigated. Here in, we present our experience with such subgroup of patients undergoing LDLT.

Efficacy of continuous plasma diafiltration therapy in critical patients with acute liver failure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a critical illness with high mortality. Plasma diafiltration (PDF) is a blood purification therapy that is useful for ALF patients, but it is difficult to use when those patients have multiple organ failure or unstable hemodynamics. In these patients, symptoms are also likely to exacerbate immediately after PDF therapy. We developed continuous PDF (CPDF) as a new concept in PDF therapy, and assessed its efficacy and safety in ALF patients.

METHODS

Ten ALF patients (gender: M/F 6/4, Age: 47 ± 14) were employed CPDF therapy. The primary outcomes were altered liver function, measured by the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and total bilirubin and prothrombin time international normalized ratios (PT-INR), 5 days after CPDF therapy. Secondary outcomes included sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores, 5 days after CPDF therapy, and the survival rate 14 days after this therapy.

RESULTS

The MELD score (34.5-28.0; P = 0.005), total bilirubin (10.9-7.25 mg/dL; P = 0.048), PT-INR (1.89-1.31; P = 0.084), and SOFA score (10.0-7.5; P < 0.039) were improved 5 days after CPDF therapy. Nine patients were alive, and one patient died because of acute pancreatitis, complicated by ALF. There were no major adverse events related to this therapy under hemodynamic stability.

CONCLUSION

In the present study, CPDF therapy safely supported liver function and generally improved the condition of critically ill patients with ALF.

Acute liver failure and liver transplantation

Acute liver failure (ALF) is defined by the presence of coagulopathy (International Normalized Ratio ≥ 1.5) and hepatic encephalopathy due to severe liver damage in patients without pre-existing liver disease. Although the mortality due to ALF without liver transplantation is over 80%, the survival rates of patients have considerably improved with the advent of liver transplantation, up to 60% to 90% in the last two decades. Recent large studies in Western countries reported 1, 5, and 10-year patient survival rates after liver transplantation for ALF of approximately 80%, 70%, and 65%, respectively. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), which has mainly evolved in Asian countries where organ availability from deceased donors is extremely scarce, has also improved the survival rate of ALF patients in these regions. According to recent reports, the overall survival rate of adult ALF patients who underwent LDLT ranges from 60% to 90%. Although there is still controversy regarding the graft type, optimal graft volume, and ethical issues, LDLT has become an established treatment option for ALF in areas where the use of deceased donor organs is severely restricted.

Right-lobe living-donor liver transplantation in adult patients with acute liver failure

BACKGROUND

Right-lobe living-donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) is an excellent option to reduce donor shortages for adult patients with acute liver failure (ALF). The aim of this study was to evaluate the etiologies and outcomes of 30 consecutive adult patients who underwent emergency RLDLT for ALF.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and September 2011, we examined data from medical records of patients with ALF who underwent RLDLT.

RESULTS

Their mean age was 32.2 ± 13.05 years. The etiologies of ALF were acute hepatitis B (n = 11; 36.6%), hepatitis A (n = 4; 13.3%), drug intoxication (n = 4; 13.3%), pregnancy (n = 2; 6.7%), hepatitis B with pregnancy (n = 1; 3.3%), mushroom intoxication (n = 1; 3.3%), and unknown (n = 7; 23.3%). The mean hepatic coma grade (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score) was 34.13 ± 8.72. The 43 (48.7%) postoperative complications were minor (grades I-II) and 44 (51.3%) were major (grades III-V). Reoperation was required in 14 of 30 (47%) recipients (grades IIIb-IVa). Deaths occurred owing to pulmonary (n = 2), cardiac (n = 1), septic (n = 2), or encephalopathic (n = 4) complications. The mean durations of intensive care unit stay and postoperative hospitalization were 3.2 ± 2.3 and 29.5 ± 23 days, respectively. The survival rate was 70%. The mean follow-up duration was 305 days (range, 1-1582).

CONCLUSION

Liver transplantation is potentially the only curative modality, markedly improving the prognosis of patients with ALF. The interval between ALF onset and death is short and crucial because of the rapid, progressive multiorgan failure. Thus, RLDLT should be considered to be a life-saving procedure for adult patients with ALF, requiring quicker access to a deceased-donor liver graft and a short ischemia time.

Fulminant viral hepatitis

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a condition wherein the previously healthy liver rapidly deteriorates, resulting in jaundice, encephalopathy, and coagulopathy. There are approximately 2000 cases per year of ALF in the United States. Viral causes (fulminant viral hepatitis [FVH]) are the predominant cause of ALF in developing countries. Given the ease of spread of viral hepatitis and the high morbidity and mortality associated with ALF, a systematic approach to the diagnosis and treatment of FVH is required. In this review, the authors describe the viral causes of ALF and review the intensive care unit management of patients with FVH.

Acute and acute severe (fulminant) autoimmune hepatitis

Autoimmune hepatitis frequently has an abrupt onset of symptoms, and it can present with acute liver failure. The abrupt presentation can indicate spontaneous exacerbation of a pre-existent chronic disease, newly created disease, a superimposed infectious or toxic injury, or new disease after viral infection, drug therapy, or liver transplantation. Deficiencies in the classical phenotype may include a low serum immunoglobulin G level and low or absent titers of the conventional autoantibodies. The original revised diagnostic scoring system of the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group can guide the diagnostic evaluation, but low scores do not preclude the diagnosis. Liver tissue examination is valuable to exclude viral-related or drug-induced liver injury and support the diagnosis by demonstrating centrilobular necrosis (usually with interface hepatitis), lymphoplasmacytic infiltration, hepatocyte rosettes, and fibrosis. Conventional therapy with prednisone and azathioprine induces clinical and laboratory improvement in 68-75 % of patients with acute presentations, and high dose prednisone or prednisolone (preferred drug) is effective in 20-100 % of patients with acute severe (fulminant) presentations. Failure to improve or worsening of any clinical or laboratory feature within 2 weeks of treatment or worsening of a mathematical model of end-stage liver disease within 7 days justifies liver transplantation in acute liver failure. Liver transplantation for acute severe (fulminant) autoimmune hepatitis is as successful as liver transplantation for autoimmune hepatitis with a chronic presentation and other types of acute liver failure (patient survival >1 year, 80-94 %). Liver transplantation should not be delayed or superseded by protracted corticosteroid therapy or the empiric institution of nonstandard medications.

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure in China

AIM: To investigate the long-term outcome of recipients and donors of adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (AALDLT) for acute liver failure (ALF).

METHODS: Between January 2005 and March 2010, 170 living donor liver transplantations were performed at West China Hospital of Sichuan University. All living liver donor was voluntary and provided informed consent. Twenty ALF patients underwent AALDLT for rapid deterioration of liver function. ALF was defined based on the criteria of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, including evidence of coagulation abnormality [international normalized ratio (INR) ≥ 1.5] and degree of mental alteration without pre-existing cirrhosis and with an illness of < 26 wk duration. We reviewed the clinical indications, operative procedure and prognosis of AALDTL performed on patients with ALF and corresponding living donors. The potential factors of recipient with ALF and corresponding donor outcome were respectively investigated using multivariate analysis. Survival rates after operation were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was undertaken to identify the threshold of potential risk factors.

RESULTS: The causes of ALF were hepatitis B (n = 18), drug-induced (n = 1) and indeterminate (n = 1). The score of the model for end-stage liver disease was 37.1 ± 8.6, and the waiting duration of recipients was 5 ± 4 d. The graft types included right lobe (n = 17) and dual graft (n = 3). The mean graft weight was 623.3 ± 111.3 g, which corresponded to graft-to-recipient weight ratio of 0.95% ± 0.14%. The segment Vor VIII hepatic vein was reconstructed in 11 right-lobe grafts. The 1-year and 3-year recipient’s survival and graft survival rates were 65% (13 of 20). Postoperative results of total bilirubin, INR and creatinine showed obvious improvements in the survived patients. However, the creatinine level of the deaths was increased postoperatively and became more aggravated compared with the level of the survived recipients. Multivariate analysis showed that waiting duration was independently correlated with increased mortality (P = 0.014). Furthermore, ROC curve revealed the cut-off value of waiting time was 5 d (P = 0.011, area under the curve = 0.791) for determining the mortality. The short-term creatinine level with different recipient’s waiting duration was described. The recipients with waiting duration ≥ 5 d showed the worse renal function and higher mortality than those with waiting duration < 5 d (66.7% vs 9.1%, P = 0.017). In addition, all donors had no residual morbidity. Furthermore, univariate analysis did not show that short assessment time induced the high morbidity (P = 0.573).

CONCLUSION: Timely AALDLT for patients with ALF greatly improves the recipient survival. However, further systemic review is needed to investigate the optimal treatment strategy for ALF.

Adult to adult living related liver transplantation: Where do we currently stand?

Adult to adult living donor liver transplantation (AALDLT) was first preformed in the United States in 1997. The procedure was rapidly integrated into clinical practice, but in 2002, possibly due to the first widely publicized donor death, the number of living liver donors plummeted. The number of donors has since reached a steady plateau far below its initial peak. In this review we evaluate the current climate of AALDLT. Specifically, we focus on several issues key to the success of AALDLT: determining the optimal indications for AALDLT, balancing graft size and donor safety, assuring adequate outflow, minimizing biliary complications, and maintaining ethical practices. We conclude by offering suggestions for the future of AALDLT in United States transplantation centers.

Outcomes after living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure in Japan: results of a nationwide survey

Nationwide surveys of acute liver failure (ALF) are conducted annually in Japan, and 20% of patients with ALF undergo liver transplantation (LT). We extracted data for 212 patients who underwent LT for ALF from the nationwide survey database of the Intractable Liver Diseases Study Group of Japan. After the exclusion of 3 patients who underwent deceased donor LT, 209 recipients of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were analyzed. ALF patients were placed into 3 subgroups according to the time from the onset of the disease to the occurrence of encephalopathy: patients who presented with encephalopathy within 10 days of the disease's onset were classified as having acute ALF, patients who presented within 11 to 56 days were classified as having subacute ALF, and patients who presented within 9 to 24 weeks were classified as having late-onset hepatic failure (LOHF). Long-term follow-up data were obtained from the registry of the Japanese Liver Transplantation Society. The 2 data sets were merged, and descriptive and survival data were analyzed. A Cox regression analysis was performed to define factors predicting overall mortality, short-term mortality (≤90 days after LT), and long-term mortality (>90 days after LT). One hundred ninety of the analyzed patients (91%) were adults (age ≥ 18 years); 70 patients (34%) were diagnosed with acute ALF, 124 (59%) were diagnosed with subacute ALF, and 15 (7%) were diagnosed with LOHF. Hepatitis B virus was the most common cause of acute ALF (61%), whereas autoimmune hepatitis (14%) and drug allergy-induced hepatitis (14%) were more frequent in patients with subacute ALF or LOHF. The cumulative patient survival rates 1, 5, and 10 years after LT were 79%, 74%, and 73%, respectively. Patient age was associated with short- and long-term mortality after LT, whereas ABO incompatibility affected short-term mortality, and donor age affected long-term mortality. In conclusion, the long-term outcomes of LDLT for ALF in this study were excellent, regardless of the etiology or classification. The majority of the donors were living donors. Increasing the deceased donor pool might be an urgent necessity.

Acute liver failure in Japan: definition, classification, and prediction of the outcome

Acute liver failure is a clinical syndrome characterized by hepatic encephalopathy and a bleeding tendency due to severe impairment of liver function caused by massive or submassive liver necrosis. Viral hepatitis is the most important and frequent cause of acute liver failure in Japan. The diagnostic criteria for fulminant hepatitis, including that caused by viral infections, autoimmune hepatitis, and drug allergy induced-liver damage, were first established in 1981. Considering the discrepancies between the definition of fulminant hepatitis in Japan and the definitions of acute liver failure in the United States and Europe, the Intractable Hepato-Biliary Disease Study Group established the diagnostic criteria for "acute liver failure" for Japan in 2011, and performed a nationwide survey of patients seen in 2010 to clarify the demographic and clinical features and outcomes of these patients. According to the survey, the survival rates of patients receiving medical treatment alone were low, especially in those with hepatic encephalopathy, despite artificial liver support, consisting of plasma exchange and hemodiafiltration, being provided to almost all patients in Japan. Thus, liver transplantation is inevitable to rescue most patients with hepatic encephalopathy. The indications for liver transplantation had, until recently, been determined according to the guideline published by the Acute Liver Failure Study Group in 1996. Recently, however, the Intractable Hepato-Biliary Disease Study Group established a scoring system to predict the outcomes of acute liver failure patients. Algorithms for outcome prediction have also been developed based on data-mining analyses. These novel guidelines need further evaluation to determine their usefulness.

The impact of renal replacement therapy before or after living donor liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

The impact of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has not yet been investigated.

METHODS

Among 253 LDLT patients, RRT was started before (RRT-Pre, n = 9), or after (RRT-Post, n = 27) LDLT. The clinical outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

The one-yr graft survival rate was 94.1% without RRT, and 63.9% and in those with RRT (p < 0.0001). Among the RRT patients, the RRT-Pre patients exhibited acute liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome and high model for end-stage liver disease score (35 ± 12), whereas the RRT-Post patients had sepsis as a comorbidity. The one-yr graft survival rate was 100.0% in the RRT-Pre patients vs. 51.9% in the RRT-Post patients (p < 0.01). The duration of RRT was significantly shorter in the RRT-Pre patients than that in the RRT-Post patients (5.3 ± 2.1 vs. 17.8 ± 14.1 d, p = 0.02). The mean duration between starting RRT and LDLT was 2.1 ± 0.7 d in the Pre-RRT patients.

CONCLUSION

The RRT-Pre patients had excellent outcomes because the severe condition was primarily treated by LDLT after short-term pre-transplant RRT. Post-transplant uncontrollable sepsis was the major cause of graft loss in patients who receive RRT after LDLT.

Adult living-related liver donation for acute liver failure: is it ethically appropriate?

Acute liver failure (ALF) results in the annual death of approximately 3.5 per million people in the United States. Unfortunately, given the marked shortage of cadaveric liver donations and the ethical questions that plague utilization of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for ALF, many patients with ALF die before a liver is allocated to them. In this review, we discuss how the consistent utilization of LDLT for ALF could decrease the mortality rate of ALF. Additionally, we examine a key underlying issue: is LDLT for ALF ethically appropriate?

Living Donor Liver Transplantation

A perception that living donor liver transplantation can be accomplished with an acceptable donor complication rate and recipient survival rate has led to the acceptance of living donor liver transplantation as a viable alternative to decreased deceased donor transplantation. Careful candidate evaluation and selection has been crucial to the success of this procedure. Advancements in the understanding of the lobar nature of the liver and of liver regeneration have advanced the surgical technique. Initial attempts at adult-to-adult donation utilized the left hepatic lobe, but now have evolved into use of the right hepatic lobe. Size matching is very important to successful graft function in the recipient. There is great concern regarding morbidity and mortality in donors. Biliary complications and infections continue to be among the most highly reported complications, although rates vary among centers and countries. Reports of single center complications have ranged from 9% to 67%. A survey of centers in the United States in 2003 reported complications of 10%. A series from our institution reported complications arising in 13 (33%) of 39 patients. A review focused on documenting donor deaths found 33 living liver donor deaths worldwide. The much publicized immediate postoperative mishap of 2002 that resulted in a donor’s death resulted in a drop in the utilization of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, from which this procedure has never fully recovered. The future development and expansion of living donor liver transplantation depends on open communication regarding donor complications and deaths. Close immediate postoperative monitoring and meticulous management will remain an essential aspect in limiting donor complications and deaths.

Acute liver failure

Acute liver failure is a rare disorder with high mortality and resource cost. In the developing world, viral causes predominate, with hepatitis E infection recognised as a common cause in many countries. In the USA and much of western Europe, the incidence of virally induced disease has declined substantially in the past few years, with most cases now arising from drug-induced liver injury, often from paracetamol. However, a large proportion of cases are of unknown origin. Acute liver failure can be associated with rapidly progressive multiorgan failure and devastating complications; however, outcomes have been improved by use of emergency liver transplantation. An evidence base for practice is emerging for supportive care, and a better understanding of the pathophysiology of the disorder, especially in relation to hepatic encephalopathy, will probably soon lead to further improvements in survival rates.

Gender-specific differences associated with living donor liver transplantation: a review study

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has developed into an important therapeutic option for liver diseases. For living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), gender-specific differences have been observed among both donors (two-thirds being women and one-third being men) and recipients (two-thirds being men and one-third being women). The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a gender disparity for LDLT. We contacted 89 national and international transplantation registries, single transplant centers, and coordinators. In addition, a sample of 274 articles dealing with LDLT and its outcomes was reviewed and compared with the registry data. The data included the gender of the donors and recipients, the country of transplantation, and the donor-recipient relationship. The investigation showed that overall there were slightly more men among the donors (53% male and 47% female). As for the recipients, 59% of the organs were distributed to males, and 41% were distributed to females. Differences in the gender distribution were observed with respect to individual countries. Worldwide, 80% of the donors were blood-related, 11% were not blood-related, and 9% were spouses. The data acquired from the publications were similar to the registry data. Our research has shown that there are hardly any registry data published, a lot of countries do not have national registries, or the access to these data is difficult. Even widely ranging published studies often do not give information on the gender distribution or the donor-recipient relationship. Further investigations are needed to understand the possible medical, psychosocial, or cultural reasons for gender distribution in LDLT and the differences in comparison with LDKT.

Emergency adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure in a hepatitis B virus endemic area

The outcomes of patients with acute liver failure (ALF) vary greatly according to etiology. Emergency adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (adult LDLT) would help address the shortage of available organs for patients with ALF, especially in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-endemic areas. We analyzed a prospective database of 110 consecutive adult patients with ALF. ALF was defined as sudden development of severe coagulopathy and encephalopathy within 26 weeks of onset of symptoms. In about 90% of patients, ALF was caused by etiologies that usually result in poor outcomes, including HBV infection (37%). Three cases (3%) were associated with acetaminophen overdose. Of the 99 patients listed for emergency liver transplantation, four (4%) underwent deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT), and 40 (40%) underwent adult LDLT. The 1-year survival rate of adult LDLT patients was 85%. Of the 55 patients listed but not transplanted, 45 (82%) died within a median of 7 days (range, 1-90 days). Multivariate analysis showed that adult LDLT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.10, P < 0.01) and DDLT (HR 0.12, P = 0.04) were associated with decreased mortality, whereas older age (HR 1.03, P = 0.01) and higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) (HR 1.03, P = 0.04) was associated with increased mortality of patients. There was no living donor mortality. Eight (17.8%) and three (6.7%) living donors experienced grade 1 and 2 complications, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Emergency adult LDLT can be performed expeditiously and safely for patients with ALF, and greatly improves the survival rate. As the window during which transplantation is possible is limited, emergency adult LDLT should be considered one of the first-line treatment options in patients with ALF, especially in regions in which ALFs are caused by etiologies associated with poor outcome and the supply of organs is severely limited.

Pediatric living-donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure: analysis of 57 cases

We reviewed 57 pediatric patients admitted with acute liver failure to Kyoto University Hospital in Japan over a period of 15 years to compare the etiology and the long-term outcome of infants and children after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Patients were divided into two groups according to age at the time of liver transplantation, infants group (<1 year, n = 20), and children group (1-18 years, n = 37). The overall survival rates were 73.6%, 69.5% and 67.2% at 1, 5, and 10 years after LDLT respectively. Age of recipients at the time of LDLT had a strong impact on their outcome, Children had significantly better outcome than infants (P = 0.001). Surgical complications were comparable between both groups. Infants had higher rates of acute cellular rejection (ACR), which was associated with features of hepatitis in many cases. Refractory ACR was the leading cause of death in eight out of 12 infants, while it resulted in loss of one child only. Cox's proportional hazard regression model was used to examine potential risk factors for graft loss and it shows that age <1 year was associated with high risk of graft loss [hazard ratio (HR) = 11.393; CI = 1.961-76.1763] (P < 0.05). In conclusion, Infants had poorer prognosis than children and refractory ACR was the leading cause of death. Using additional immunosuppressant for cases with severe and atypical rejections is recommended.

Long-term outcomes of emergency liver transplantation for acute liver failure

Acute liver failure continues to be associated with a high mortality rate, and emergency liver transplantation is often the only life-saving treatment. The short-term outcomes are decidedly worse in comparison with those for nonurgent cases, whereas the long-term results have not been reported as extensively. We report our center's experience with urgent liver transplantation, long-term survival, and major complications. From 1994 to 2007, 60 patients had emergency liver transplantation for acute liver failure. The waiting list mortality rate was 6%. The mean waiting time was 2.7 days. Post-transplantation, the perioperative mortality rate was 15%, and complications included neurological problems (13%), biliary problems (10%), and hepatic artery thrombosis (5%). The 5- and 10-year patient survival rates were 76% and 69%, respectively, and the graft survival rates were 65% and 59%. Recipients of blood group-incompatible grafts had an 83% retransplantation rate. Univariate analysis by Cox regression analysis found that cerebral edema and extended criteria donor grafts were associated with worse long-term survival. Severe cerebral edema on a computed tomography scan pre-transplant was associated with either early mortality or permanent neurological deficits. The keys to long-term success and continued progress in urgent liver transplantation are the use of good-quality whole grafts and a short waiting list time, both of which depend on access to a sufficient pool of organ donors. Severe preoperative cerebral edema should be a relative contraindication to transplantation.

Liver transplantation: an update 2009

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review we focus on three challenging aspects of liver transplantation: living donor liver transplant, transplantation in HIV-positive recipients and down-staging of hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study is providing valuable information on recipient and donor outcomes associated with living donor liver transplantation. The recipient outcomes with living donor liver transplantation are comparable to those with deceased donor liver transplantation for most diseases, but increased hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence has been reported with living donor liver transplantation. Donor morbidity is not infrequent and donor mortality remains a concern. Liver transplantation for HIV-positive recipients is associated with equivalent outcomes as HIV-negative recipients for selected recipients. Transplantation in coinfected recipients (HIV and HCV+) is associated with less favorable outcomes. Drug interaction between immunosuppression and highly active antiretroviral therapy is increasingly recognized and requires major modifications in dosing. Down-staging hepatocellular carcinoma to within transplant criteria is being used in some centers using loco-regional therapy. Waiting time after loco-regional therapy is currently the best predictor of recurrence. The role of newer chemotherapeutics is being tested as part of neoadjuvant therapy after resection or loco-regional therapy.

SUMMARY

Living donor liver transplantation is a viable strategy to increase transplantation and reduce death on the waiting list. Donor morbidity should be the subject of further efforts to minimize these risks. The increased recurrence risk with living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma warrants further study. Careful coordination between transplant professionals and HIV experts is necessary to monitor issues of posttransplant care of the HIV-infected recipient. The role of loco-regional therapies in down-staging patients with hepatocellular carcinoma is expanding.

Outcome after wait-listing for emergency liver transplantation in acute liver failure: a single centre experience

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Though emergency liver transplantation (ELT) is an established treatment for severe acute liver failure (ALF), outcomes are inferior to elective surgery. Despite prioritization, many patients deteriorate, becoming unsuitable for ELT.

METHODS

We examined a single-centre experience of 310 adult patients with ALF registered for ELT over a 10-year period to determine factors associated with failure to transplant, and in those patients undergoing ELT, those associated with 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-two (43%) patients had ALF resulting from paracetamol and 178 (57%) from non-paracetamol causes. Seventy-four patients (24%) did not undergo surgery; 92% of these died. Failure to transplant was more likely in patients requiring vasopressors at listing (hazard ratio 1.9 (95% CI 1.1-3.6)) paracetamol aetiology (2.5 (1.4-4.6)) but less likely in blood group A (0.5 (0.3-0.9)). Post-ELT survival at 90-days and one-year increased from 66% and 63% in 1994-1999 to 81% and 79% in 2000-2004 (p<0.01). Four variables were associated with post-ELT mortality; age >45 years (3 (1.7-5.3)), vasopressor requirement (2.2 (1.3-3.8), transplantation before 2000 (1.9 (1.1-3.3)) and use of high-risk grafts (2.3 (1.3-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The data indicate improved outcomes in the later era, despite higher level patient dependency and greater use of high-risk grafts, through improved graft/recipient matching.

Acute liver failure and living donor liver transplantation

Acute liver failure (ALF) is defined by the presence of hepatic encephalopathy due to severe liver damage in patients without pre-existing liver disease. Although the mortality of ALF without liver transplantation is over 80%, the survival rates of ALF patients have improved considerably with the advent of liver transplantation, up to 60-80% in the last decade. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), which has mainly evolved in Asian countries where organ availability from deceased donors is extremely scarce, has also improved the survival rate of ALF patients. According to recent reports, the overall survival rate of adult ALF patients who underwent LDLT is 60% to 90%. Although there is still controversy regarding the graft type, the optimal graft volume, and ethical issues of defining the indications for LDLT in ALF patients with respect to donor risk, LDLT has become an established treatment option for ALF in areas where the use of deceased donors organs is severely restricted.

Postoperative issues and outcome for acute liver failure

1. Establishing the cause of fulminant hepatitis is an important determinant in outcomes after liver transplantation. 2. Liver transplantation is an integral part of the management of ALF. 3. In addition to generic posttransplant care, neurologic, septic, and hematologic issues need to be addressed. 4. Outcomes after liver transplantation are poorer than those for elective transplantation but superior to those found for comparably ill patients being transplanted for chronic liver disease. 5. Multiple factors have an influence on outcome, and risk stratification is beginning to emerge.