Is retransplantation an option for recurrent hepatitis C cirrhosis after liver transplantation?

Is Liver Retransplantation Justified in the Current Era?

INTRODUCTION

Liver retransplantation (LRT) is a controversial indication. Our aim was to evaluate the rate of LRT at our institution, and to analyze its indications and short- and long-term results.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of a prospectively collected database, including 1645 LT from 1984 to 2018. Results have been analyzed depending on type of LRT (early vs late), study period and indications.

RESULTS

We performed 150 LRT in 140 patients. The LRT rate was 9%. Of these, 45 LRT were early (30%), and the other 70% were late LRT. The main indications were: ischemic cholangitis (27%), arterial thrombosis (19%), primary non-function (15%), and HCV recurrence (15%). Mean surgery duration (395 vs. 270 min; P = .001), cold ischemia time (435 vs. 390 min; P = .005) and transfused units required (8 vs. 5 RBC; P = .034) were higher in cases of late LRT. Postoperative mortality (10 vs. 20%; P = .01) was better in cases of late LRT. One- and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 71% and 58%, respectively, which were significantly better during the last decade (80% and 64%). Five-year actuarial survival for ischemic cholangitis is better than other indications, such as recurrence of HCV (78 vs. 51%; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver retransplantation is complex and associated with high morbidity and mortality. However, indications and long-term results have improved during recent years. Therefore, LRT is justified.

Hepatic retransplant: what have we learned?

Hepatic retransplant accounts for 5% to 15% of liver transplants in most series and is associated with significantly increased hospital costs and inferior patient survival when compared with primary liver transplant. Early retransplants are usually due to primary graft nonfunction or vascular thrombosis, whereas later retransplants are most commonly necessitated by chronic rejection or recurrent primary liver disease. Hepatic retransplant remains the sole option for survival in many patients facing allograft failure after liver transplant. With improved techniques to match retransplant candidates with appropriate donor grafts, it is hoped that the outcomes of retransplant will continue to improve in future.

Strategies to reduce hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major health problem that leads to chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, being the most frequent indication for liver transplantation in several countries. Unfortunately, HCV re-infects the liver graft almost invariably following reperfusion, with an accelerated history of recurrence, leading to 10%-30% of patients progressing to cirrhosis within 5 years of transplantation. In this sense, some groups have even advocated for not re-transplanting this patients, as lower patient and graft outcomes have been reported. However, the management of HCV recurrence is being optimized and several strategies to reduce post-transplant recurrence could improve outcomes, decrease the rate of re-transplantation and optimize the use of available grafts. Three moments may be the focus of potential actions in order to decrease the impact of viral recurrence: the pre-transplant moment, the transplant environment and the post-transplant management. In the pre-transplant setting, it is not well established if reducing the pre transplant viral load affects the risk for HCV progression after transplant. Obviously, antiviral treatment can render the patient HCV RNA negative post transplant but the long-term benefit has not yet been fully established to justify the cost and clinical risk. In the transplant moment, factors as donor age, cold ischemia time, graft steatosis and ischemia/reperfusion injury may lead to a higher and more aggressive viral recurrence. After the transplant, discussion about immunosuppression and the moment to start the treatment (prophylactic, pre-emptive or once-confirmed) together with new antiviral drugs are of interest. This review aims to help clinicians have a global overview of post-transplant HCV recurrence and strategies to reduce its impact on our patients.

Donor-recipient matching: myths and realities

Liver transplant outcomes keep improving, with refinements of surgical technique, immunosuppression and post-transplant care. However, these excellent results and the limited number of organs available have led to an increasing number of potential recipients with end-stage liver disease worldwide. Deaths on waiting lists have led liver transplant teams maximize every organ offered and used in terms of pre and post-transplant benefit. Donor-recipient (D-R) matching could be defined as the technique to check D-R pairs adequately associated by the presence of the constituents of some patterns from donor and patient variables. D-R matching has been strongly analysed and policies in donor allocation have tried to maximize organ utilization whilst still protecting individual interests. However, D-R matching has been written through trial and error and the development of each new score has been followed by strong discrepancies and controversies. Current allocation systems are based on isolated or combined donor or recipient characteristics. This review intends to analyze current knowledge about D-R matching methods, focusing on three main categories: patient-based policies, donor-based policies and combined donor-recipient systems. All of them lay on three mainstays that support three different concepts of D-R matching: prioritarianism (favouring the worst-off), utilitarianism (maximising total benefit) and social benefit (cost-effectiveness). All of them, with their pros and cons, offer an exciting controversial topic to be discussed. All of them together define D-R matching today, turning into myth what we considered a reality in the past.

Management of hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been associated with progression to cirrhosis in approximately 20% of patients, 5 years postoperatively. Accelerated decompensation has also been noted when compared with cirrhosis in non-transplant patients. Different treatment strategies are available for recurrent HCV infection post-OLT, but efforts are hindered by the modest response rates, poor tolerability and the risk of rejection as well as graft loss. Anti-HCV immunoglobulin therapy to prevent graft infection with HCV has no established role at present but studies are ongoing. Treatment prior to transplantation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has been evaluated but the results are too preliminary to make firm recommendations. Prophylactic interferon-based antiviral therapy in the early postoperative period to prevent graft infection was shown to have low response rates and high rates of adverse effects. Treatment of established recurrent HCV infection with combination peginterferon (pegylated interferon) and ribavirin is associated with 10-59% sustained virological response and the predictive value of a positive early virological response has been validated in the post-transplant setting. Improvement in inflammatory activity after viral eradication is well established, but fibrosis regression or stabilisation is less predictable and factors such as rejection and biliary complications may still contribute to graft loss. Most studies have initiated therapy at least 6 months postoperatively in order to optimise patient tolerance and enable the addition of ribavirin. The use of adjuvant agents to treat drug-induced neutropenia and anaemia in this population is evolving and becoming a crucial part of therapy. Determination of optimal doses of both pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and guidance on when to stop treatment, as well as improving tolerability are important steps in achieving higher response rates and minimising drug toxicity.

Dynamic FDG-PET is useful for detection of cholangiocarcinoma in patients with PSC listed for liver transplantation

Five to 15% of patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) develop cholangiocarcinoma (CC) with a median survival of 5 to 7 months, an outcome not significantly improved by liver transplantation. However, if CC is found incidentally during the procedure or in the explanted liver, 5-year survival rates of 35% are reported. A noninvasive method to detect CC small enough to allow for intended curative surgery is needed. Unfortunately, computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) have poor sensitivity for detection of CC in PSC; however, positron emission tomography (PET) using 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) differentiates well between CC and nonmalignant tissue. We examined whether PET findings are valid using a blinded study design comparing pretransplantation FDG-PET results with histology of explanted livers. Dynamic FDG-PET was performed in 24 consecutive patients with PSC within 2 weeks after listing for liver transplantation and with no evidence of malignancy on CT, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasonography. The PET Center staff was blinded to clinical findings, and surgeons and pathologists were blinded to the PET results. Three patients had CC that was correctly identified by PET. PET was negative in 1 patient with high-grade hilar duct dysplasia. In 20 patients without malignancies, PET was false positive in 1 patient with epitheloid granulomas in the liver. In conclusion, dynamic FDG-PET appears superior to conventional imaging techniques for both detection and exclusion of CC in advanced PSC. FDG-PET may be useful for screening for CC in the pretransplant evaluation of patients with PSC.

Survival of liver transplant patients coinfected with HIV and HCV is adversely impacted by recurrent hepatitis C

Although liver transplantation (LTx) in HIV-positive patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has been successful, some have reported poorer outcomes in patients coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Here we discuss the impact of recurrent HCV on 27 HIV-positive patients who underwent LTx. HIV infection was well controlled post-transplantation. Survival in HIV-positive/HCV-positive patients was shorter compared to a cohort of HIV-negative/HCV-positive patients matched in age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and time of transplant, with cumulative 1-, 3- and 5-year patient survival of 66.7%, 55.6% and 33.3% versus 75.7%, 71.6% and 71.6%, respectively, although not significantly (p = 0.07), and there was a higher likelihood of developing cirrhosis or dying from an HCV-related complication in coinfected subjects (RR = 2.6, 95% CI, 1.06-6.35; p = 0.03). Risk factors for poor survival included African-American race (p = 0.02), MELD score > 20 (p = 0.05), HAART intolerance postLTx (p = 0.01), and postLTx HCV RNA > 30000000 IU/mL (p = 0.00). Recurrent HCV in 18 patients was associated with eight deaths, including three from fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Among surviving coinfected recipients, five are alive at least 3 years after LTx, and of 15 patients treated with interferon-alpha/ribavirin, six (40%) are HCV RNA negative, including four with sustained virological response. Hepatitis C is a major cause of graft loss and patient mortality in coinfected patients undergoing LTx.

Recurrence of diseases following orthotopic liver transplantation

Long-term graft survival and mortality after liver transplantation continue to improve. However, disease recurrence remains a major stumbling block, especially among patients with hepatitis C. Chronic hepatitis C recurs to varying degrees in nearly all patients who undergo transplantation. Transplantation for hepatitis C is associated with higher rates of graft failure and death compared with transplantation for other indications, and retransplantation for hepatitis C related liver failure remains controversial. Recurrence of hepatitis B has been markedly reduced with improved prophylactic regimens. Further, rates of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence have also decreased, as improved patient selection criteria have prioritized transplantation for those with a low risk of recurrence. Primary biliary cirrhosis recurs in some patients, but it is often relatively mild. Autoimmune liver disease has also been shown to have a relatively benign post-transplantation course, but some studies have indicated that it slowly progresses in most recipients. It has been recently reported that alcoholic liver disease liver transplant recipients who return to drinking have worsened mortality. In such patients worse outcomes are not due to graft failure, but instead to other comorbidities. Recurrences of other diseases, including nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis, are now being recognized as having potentially detrimental effects on graft survival and mortality. Expert clinical management may help prevent and treat complications associated with disease recurrence.