Results of Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Transplantation: A Single-Center Review

Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic renal disease: Challenges of interventional treatment

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignancy worldwide, recognized as the fourth most common cause of cancer related death. Many risk factors, leading to liver cirrhosis and associated HCC, have been recognized, among them viral hepatitis infections play an important role worldwide. Patients suffering from chronic kidney disease (CKD), especially those on maintenance dialysis, show a higher prevalence of viral hepatitis than the general population what increases the risk of HCC onset. In addition, renal dysfunction may have a negative prognostic impact on both immediate and long-term outcomes after malignancy treatment. Several interventional procedures for the treatment of HCC are currently available: thermal ablation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, liver surgery or even liver transplantation. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system provides an evidence-based treatment algorithm to address different categories of patients to the most-effective treatment in consideration of the extension of disease, liver function and performance status. Liver resection and transplantation are usually reserved to patients with early stage HCC and acceptable performance status, while the other treatments are more indicated in case of impaired liver function or locally advanced or unresectable tumors. However, there is no validated treatment algorithm for HCC in CKD patients, mainly due to the rarity of reports in this cohort of patients. Hereby we discuss the available evidences on interventional HCC treatments in CKD patients, and briefly report up-to-date pharmacological therapy for HCC patients affected by viral hepatitis.

Kidney Rejection Following Simultaneous Liver-kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Donor-specific antibodies are reported to increase the risk of rejection and reduce allograft survival following simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation. Optimal immunosuppression regimens to reduce this risk and to treat rejection episodes are underinvestigated.

METHODS

Cohort analysis of the first 27 simultaneous liver-kidney transplant recipients, between 2014 and 2018 at our unit, is performed under a new risk stratification policy. Those with donor-specific antibodies to class II HLA with a mean fluorescence intensity >10 000 are considered high risk for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). These patients received immunosuppression, which consisted of induction therapy, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone. All other patients are considered low risk and received tacrolimus and prednisolone alone.

RESULTS

Three patients were high risk for rejection, and 2 of these patients developed AMR, which was treated with plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin. At 1 y, their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were 50 and 59 mL/min. Two other patients developed AMR, which was similarly treated, and their 1-y eGFR was 31 and 50 mL/min. The overall histologically proven acute rejection rate within the first year was 33%, and median eGFR, for the 27 patients, at 1 y was 52 mL/min and at 2 y was 49 mL/min.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that there is a risk of AMR following simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation despite increased immunosuppression. This can be effectively treated with plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin.

Liver Retransplantation Associated With Kidney Transplantation for End-stage Liver Graft Disease and Renal Insufficiency: A Morbid Procedure on a Unique Subgroup of Patients

BACKGROUND

Chronic renal disease (CKD) jeopardizes the long-term outcomes of liver transplant recipients. In patients with end-stage liver graft disease and CKD, liver retransplantation associated with kidney transplantation (ReLT-KT) might be necessary. Yet, this specific subset of patients remains poorly described.

METHODS

Indications, perioperative characteristics, and short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing ReLT-KT at 2 transplantation units from 1994 to 2012 were analyzed. Risk factors for postoperative mortality and long-term survivals were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 3060 patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT), 45 (1.5%) underwent ReLT-KT. The proportion of ReLT-KT among LT recipients continuously grew throughout the study period from 0.3% to 2.4% (P < 0.001). Median time from primary LT to ReLT-KT was 151.3 (7.5-282.9) months. The most frequent indications for liver retransplantation were recurrence of the primary liver disease and cholangitis in 15 (33.3%) cases each. CKD was related to calcineurin inhibitors toxicity in 38 (84.4%) cases. Twelve (26.7%) patients died postoperatively. D-MELD (donor age × recipients' MELD) was associated with postoperative mortality (HR: 8.027; 95% CI: 2.387-18.223; P = 0.026) and optimal cut-off value was 1039 (AUC: 0.801; P = 0.002). Overall 1, 3, and 5 years survivals were 68.8%, 65.9%, and 59.5%, respectively. D-MELD > 1039 was the only factor associated with poor survival (P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

ReLT-KT is a highly morbid increasingly performed procedure. Refinements in the selection of grafts and transplant candidates are required to limit the postoperative mortality of these patients.

International Liver Transplantation Society Consensus Statement on Immunosuppression in Liver Transplant Recipients

Effective immunosupression management is central to achieving optimal outcomes in liver transplant recipients. Current immunosuppression regimens and agents are highly effective in minimizing graft loss due to acute and chronic rejection but can also produce a substantial array of toxicities. The utilization of immunosuppression varies widely, contributing to the wide disparities in posttransplant outcomes reported between transplant centers. The International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS) convened a consensus conference, comprised of a global panel of expert hepatologists, transplant surgeons, nephrologists, and pharmacologists to review the literature and experience pertaining to immunosuppression management to develop guidelines on key aspects of immunosuppression. The consensus findings and recommendations of the ILTS Consensus guidelines on immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients are presented in this article.

Receiving Hypertensive Donor Grafts Is Associated with Inferior Prognosis in Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplantation Recipients

Background

The impact of hypertensive (HTN) donor grafts on the prognosis of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) patient is not known, and an applicable risk scoring system for SLKT patient survival is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of donor HTN on patient survival of SLKT recipients and to identify independent risk factors.

Material/Methods

Data from 3844 adult SLKT recipients receiving deceased donor grafts from March 2002 to December 2014 in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database were retrospectively analyzed. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare patient and graft survival. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were built to identify independent risk factors associated with patient and graft survival.

Results

SLKT patients receiving HTN donor grafts had significantly shorter 5-year patient survival and kidney graft survival rates than did those receiving non-HTN donor grafts (50.1% vs. 63.2%, p<0.0001 and 45.4% vs. 67.8%, p<0.0001, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified HTN donor, donor age, donation after cardiac death, cold ischemia time, recipient age, recipient condition at transplant, recipient hepatitis C infection, need for life support, and recipient pre-transplant albumin level as independent risk factors associated with inferior patient survival in SLKT recipients. A risk scoring model that predicted excellent stratification of prognostic subgroups was established (AUC, 0.762; 95% CI, 0.739–0.785).

Conclusions

An SLKT patient receiving a graft from an HTN donor has an inferior prognosis. A risk scoring system applicable to patient survival in SLKT recipients was developed.

Effect of transplant center volume on post-transplant survival in patients listed for simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation

AIM

To examine the effect of center size on survival differences between simultaneous liver kidney transplantation (SLKT) and liver transplantation alone (LTA) in SLKT-listed patients.

METHODS

The United Network of Organ Sharing database was queried for patients ≥ 18 years of age listed for SLKT between February 2002 and December 2015. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using stratified Cox regression with interaction between transplant type (LTA vs SLKT) and center volume.

RESULTS

During the study period, 393 of 4580 patients (9%) listed for SLKT underwent a LTA. Overall mortality was higher among LTA recipients (180/393, 46%) than SLKT recipients (1107/4187, 26%). The Cox model predicted a significant survival disadvantage for patients receiving LTA vs SLKT [hazard ratio, hazard ratio (HR) = 2.85; 95%CI: 2.21, 3.66; P < 0.001] in centers performing 30 SLKT over the study period. This disadvantage was modestly attenuated as center SLKT volume increased, with a 3% reduction (HR = 0.97; 95%CI: 0.95, 0.99; P = 0.010) for every 10 SLKs performed.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, LTA is associated with increased mortality among patients listed for SLKT. This difference is modestly attenuated at more experienced centers and may explain inconsistencies between smaller-center and larger registry-wide studies comparing SLKT and LTA outcomes.

Environmental peer pressure: CD4+ T cell help in tolerance and transplantation

The liver participates in a multitude of metabolic functions that are critical for sustaining human life. Despite constant encounters with antigenic-rich intestinal blood, oxidative stress, and metabolic intermediates, there is no appreciable immune response. Interestingly, patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation benefit from a high rate of graft acceptance in comparison to other solid organ transplant recipients. In fact, cotransplantation of a donor liver in tandem with a rejection-prone graft increases the likelihood of graft acceptance. A variety of players may account for this phenomenon including the interaction of intrahepatic antigen-presenting cells with CD4⁺ T cells and the preferential induction of forkhead box P3 (Foxp3) expression on CD4⁺ T cells following injurious stimuli. Ineffective insult management can cause chronic liver disease, which manifests systemically as the following: antibody-mediated disorders, ineffective antiviral and antibacterial immunity, and gastrointestinal disorders. These sequelae sharing the requirement of CD4⁺ T cell help to coordinate aberrant immune responses. In this review, we will focus on CD4⁺ T cell help due to the shared requirements in hepatic tolerance and coordination of extrahepatic immune responses. Overall, intrahepatic deviations from steady state can have deleterious systemic immune outcomes and highlight the liver's remarkable capacity to maintain a balance between tolerance and inflammatory response while simultaneously being inundated with a panoply of antigenic stimuli. Liver Transplantation 24 89-97 2018 AASLD.

Endoscopic Approaches to the Treatment of Variceal Hemorrhage in Hemodialysis-Dependent Patients

Background. Esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage leads to challenging situation in chronic kidney disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis. Aims. To determine the safety and efficacy of endoscopic approaches to patients with hemodialysis-dependent concomitant with esophagogastric varices. Methods. Medical records were reviewed from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2015, in our hospital. Five consecutive hemodialysis-dependent patients with variceal hemorrhage who underwent endoscopic treatments were retrospectively studied. Results. The median age of the patients was 54 years (range 34–67 years) and the median follow-up period was 21.3 months (range 7–134 months). All the patients received a total of three times heparin-free hemodialysis 24 hours before and no more than 24 hours and 72 hours after endoscopic treatment. They successfully had endoscopic variceal ligation, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, and/or N-butyl cyanoacrylate injection. The short-term efficacy is satisfying and long-term follow-up showed episodes of rebleeding. Conclusions. Endoscopic approaches are the alternative options in the treatment of upper gastroenterology variceal hemorrhage in hemodialysis-dependent patients without severe complications.

Successful Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplantation in the Presence of Multiple High-Titered Class I and II Antidonor HLA Antibodies

The results of simultaneous liver-kidney transplants in highly sensitized recipients have been controversial in terms of antibody-mediated rejection and kidney allograft outcomes. This case report provides a detailed and sophisticated documentation of histocompatibility and pathologic data in a simultaneous liver-kidney transplant performed in a recipient with multiple high-titered class I and II antidonor HLA antibodies and a strongly positive cytotoxic crossmatch. Patient received induction with steroids, rituximab, and eculizumab without lymphocyte depleting agents. The kidney transplant was delayed by 6 hours after the liver transplant to allow more time to the liver allograft to “absorb” donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Interestingly, the liver allograft did not prevent immediate antibody-mediated injury to the kidney allograft in this highly sensitized recipient. Anti-HLA single antigen bead analysis of liver and kidney allograft biopsy eluates revealed deposition of both class I and II DSA in both liver and kidney transplants during the first 2 weeks after transplant. Afterward, both liver and kidney allograft functions improved and remained normal after a year with progressive reduction in serum DSA values.