Inequity in organ allocation for patients awaiting liver transplantation: Rationale for uncapping the model for end-stage liver disease

Update on Hepatorenal Syndrome: From Pathophysiology to Treatment

Hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) occurs in the setting of advanced chronic liver disease, portal hypertension, and ascites. HRS-AKI is found in ∼20% of patients presenting to the hospital with AKI, but it may coexist with other causes of AKI and/or with preexisting chronic kidney disease, thereby making the diagnosis challenging. Novel biomarkers such as urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin may be useful. While HRS-AKI is a functional form of AKI related to circulatory and neurohormonal dysfunction, there is increasing recognition of the importance of systemic inflammation and the renal microenvironment. Early diagnosis and initiation of HRS-AKI-specific treatment can improve outcomes. The mainstay of therapy is a vasoconstrictor (terlipressin or norepinephrine) combined with albumin, which achieves resolution of HRS in 40-50% of cases. Liver transplantation is the only option for patients failing to respond to medical therapies.

Acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis: Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) and International Club of Ascites (ICA) joint multidisciplinary consensus meeting

Patients with cirrhosis are prone to developing acute kidney injury (AKI), a complication associated with a markedly increased in-hospital morbidity and mortality, along with a risk of progression to chronic kidney disease. Whereas patients with cirrhosis are at increased risk of developing any phenotype of AKI, hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a specific form of AKI (HRS-AKI) in patients with advanced cirrhosis and ascites, carries an especially high mortality risk. Early recognition of HRS-AKI is crucial since administration of splanchnic vasoconstrictors may reverse the AKI and serve as a bridge to liver transplantation, the only curative option. In 2023, a joint meeting of the International Club of Ascites (ICA) and the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) was convened to develop new diagnostic criteria for HRS-AKI, to provide graded recommendations for the work-up, management and post-discharge follow-up of patients with cirrhosis and AKI, and to highlight priorities for further research.

Mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease above model for end-stage liver disease 3.0 of 40

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Since the implementation of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score to determine waitlist priority for liver transplant (LT) in 2002, the score has been capped at 40. Recently, the MELD 3.0 score was proposed to improve upon MELD-Na. Here, we examine waitlist mortality and LT outcomes in patients with MELD 3.0 ≥ 40 to assess the potential impact of uncapping the score.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Adult waitlist registrations for LT from January 2016 to December 2021 were identified in the registry data from the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network. All MELD 3.0 scores were calculated at registration and thereafter. Waitlist mortality for up to 30 days was calculated as well as post-LT survival. There were 54,060 new waitlist registrations during the study period, of whom 2820 (5.2%) had MELD 3.0 ≥ 40 at listing. The 30-day waitlist mortality was high in these patients, yet it increased further in proportion with MELD 3.0 up to a score of 55 with 30-day mortality of 58.3% for MELD 3.0 of 40-44 and 82.4% for ≥50. The multivariable hazard ratio was 1.13 for each point of MELD 3.0, adjusting for several variables including acute-on-chronic liver failure. The number of LT recipients with MELD 40 at transplant increased from 155 in 2002 to 752 in 2021. Posttransplant survival was comparable across MELD strata including MELD of 35-39.

CONCLUSION

MELD 3.0 scores beyond 40 are associated with increasing waitlist mortality without adversely affecting posttransplant outcome. Uncapping the MELD score in waitlist candidates may lead to greater survival benefit from LT.

Clinical Validation of a Novel Scoring System Based on Donor and Recipient Risk Factors for Predicting Outcomes in Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND Adequate donor and recipient matching in liver transplantation is crucial to improve patient survival. Our objective was to propose and validate a new model for predicting outcomes using donor and recipient scoring criteria. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data of all patients (n=932) who underwent liver transplantation (n=1106) from January 2006 to December 2018. For score standardization, 30% (n=280) of patients were randomly selected for analysis and divided into 3 categories: ≤4 points, 5 to 8 points, and >8 points. Scoring system validation was performed on a dataset with 70% (n=652) of the patients. RESULTS Survival of the stratified group (30%) was significant (P<0.001). Scores of 4 to 8 points presented lower risk of death (1.74 [CI 0.97-3.13; P=0.062]), while >8 points presented higher risk (2.74 [CI 1.36-5.57; P=0.005]). In the validation score (70%), global survival was significant (P<0.0016); patients with scores of 4 to 8 points had lower risk of death (1.16 [CI 1.16-2.38; P=0.005]); and scores >8 points (2.22 [CI 1.40-3.50; P<0.001]), retransplant, fulminant hepatitis, previous large abdominal/biliary tree surgery, MELD score, and serum creatinine before liver transplantation >1.5 mg/dL (P<0.05) presented higher risk. Individual recipient factors with 4 to 8 points had a lower risk of death (2.29 [CI 1.82-2.87; P<0.0001]) than those with scores >8 points (4.02 [CI 2.22-7.26; P<0.0001]). CONCLUSIONS A novel prognostic-based scoring system using donor and recipient characteristics was proposed and clinically validated. Two-factor scoring indicated the superiority of the predictability outcome and improved prediction of higher mortality.

Are MELD and MELDNa Still Reliable Tools to Predict Mortality on the Liver Transplant Waiting List?

Liver transplantation is the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease. Unfortunately, the scarcity of donor organs and the increasing pool of potential recipients limit access to this life-saving procedure. Allocation should account for medical and ethical factors, ensuring equal access to transplantation regardless of recipient's gender, race, religion, or income. Based on their short-term prognosis prediction, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and MELD sodium (MELDNa) have been widely used to prioritize patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation resulting in a significant decrease in waiting list mortality/removal. Recent concern has been raised regarding the prognostic accuracy of MELD and MELDNa due, in part, to changes in recipients' profile such as body mass index, comorbidities, and general condition, including nutritional status and cause of liver disease, among others. This review aims to provide a comprehensive view of the current state of MELD and MELDNa advantages and limitations and promising alternatives. Finally, it will explore future options to increase the donor pool and improve donor-recipient matching.

MELD 3.0: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Updated for the Modern Era

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) has been established as a reliable indicator of short-term survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. The current version (MELDNa), consisting of the international normalized ratio and serum bilirubin, creatinine, and sodium, has been used to determine organ allocation priorities for liver transplantation in the United States. The objective was to optimize MELD further by taking into account additional variables and updating coefficients with contemporary data.

METHODS

All candidates registered on the liver transplant wait list in the US national registry from January 2016 through December 2018 were included. Uni- and multivariable Cox models were developed to predict survival up to 90 days after wait list registration. Model fit was tested using the concordance statistic (C-statistic) and reclassification, and the Liver Simulated Allocation Model was used to estimate the impact of replacing MELDNa with the new model.

RESULTS

The final multivariable model was characterized by (1) additional variables of female sex and serum albumin, (2) interactions between bilirubin and sodium and between albumin and creatinine, and (3) an upper bound for creatinine at 3.0 mg/dL. The final model (MELD 3.0) had better discrimination than MELDNa (C-statistic, 0.869 vs 0.862; P < .01). Importantly, MELD 3.0 correctly reclassified a net of 8.8% of decedents to a higher MELD tier, affording them a meaningfully higher chance of transplantation, particularly in women. In the Liver Simulated Allocation Model analysis, MELD 3.0 resulted in fewer wait list deaths compared to MELDNa (7788 vs 7850; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

MELD 3.0 affords more accurate mortality prediction in general than MELDNa and addresses determinants of wait list outcomes, including the sex disparity.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

APPROACH AND RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Early prediction of acute kidney injury after liver transplantation by scoring system and decision tree

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Early detection of acute kidney injury (AKI) is crucial for the prognosis of patients after liver transplantation (LT). This passage aims to analyze the perioperative clinical markers of AKI after LT and establish predictive models based on clinical variables for early detection of AKI after LT.

METHODS

We prospectively collected 109 patients with LT, and compared the differences of perioperative clinical markers between the AKI group and non-AKI group. The scoring system and decision tree model were established through the risk factors. Another 163 patients who underwent LT in the same center from 2017 to 2018 were retrospectively collected to verify the models.

RESULTS

In multiple comparisons of risk factors of post-LT AKI, pre-operative factors were excluded automatically, intraoperative and post-operative factors including operating time, intraoperative hypotension time, post-operative infection, the peak of post-operative AST, and post-operative shock were the independent risk factors for post-LT AKI. The scoring system established with the risk factors has good predictive power (AUC = 0.755) in the validation cohort. The decision tree also shows that post-operative shock was the most important marker, followed by post-operative infection.

CONCLUSION

Five intraoperative and post-operative factors are independently associated with post-LT AKI rather than pre-operative factors, which indicates that operation technique and post-operative management may more important for the prevention of post-LT AKI. The scoring system and decision tree model could complement each other, and provide quantitative and intuitive prediction tools for clinical practice of early detection of post-LT AKI.

Advances in management of hepatorenal syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is encountered frequently in patients with end-stage liver disease and remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in this patient population. This review will focus and provide updates on pathophysiology, assessment of kidney function, new definitions, and treatment and prevention of HRS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pathophysiology of HRS has been elucidated more recently and in addition to hemodynamic changes, the role of systemic inflammatory response contributes significantly to this process. Assessment of kidney function in patients with liver cirrhosis remains challenging. Novel glomerular filtration rate equations have been developed in patients with liver disease to better estimate kidney function and changes made in the definition of acute kidney injury (AKI), which are more aligned with KDIGO criteria for AKI. Vasoconstrictors, especially terlipressin, along with albumin remain the mainstay of pharmacological treatment of HRS-AKI. Biomarkers have been useful in differentiating ATN from HRS at an early stage.

SUMMARY

HRS remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with end-stage liver disease. Newer understanding of mechanisms in development and pathophysiology of HRS have helped with elucidation of the disease process.

Refitting the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease for the Eurotransplant Region

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The United Network for Organ Sharing's Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (UNOS-MELD) score is the basis of liver allocation in the Eurotransplant region. It was constructed 20 years ago in a small US cohort and has remained unchanged ever since. The best boundaries and coefficients were never calculated for any region outside the United States. Therefore, this study refits the MELD (reMELD) for the Eurotransplant region.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

All adult patients listed for a first liver transplantation between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2018, were included. Data were randomly split in a training set (70%) and a validation set (30%). In the training data, generalized additive models with splines were plotted for each MELD parameter. The lower and upper bound combinations with the maximum log-likelihood were chosen for the final models. The refit models were tested in the validation data with C-indices and Brier scores. Through likelihood ratio tests the refit models were compared to UNOS-MELD. The correlation between scores and survival of prioritized patients was calculated. A total of 6,684 patients were included. Based on training data, refit parameters were capped at creatinine 0.7-2.5, bilirubin 0.3-27, international normalized ratio 0.1-2.6, and sodium 120-139. ReMELD and reMELD-Na showed C-indices of 0.866 and 0.869, respectively. ReMELD-Na prioritized patients with 1.6 times higher 90-day mortality probabilities compared to UNOS-MELD.

CONCLUSIONS

Refitting MELD resulted in new lower and upper bounds for each parameter. The predictive power of reMELD-Na was significantly higher than UNOS-MELD. ReMELD prioritized patients with higher 90-day mortality rates. Thus, reMELD(-Na) should replace UNOS-MELD for liver graft allocation in the Eurotransplant region.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure: Where do we stand?

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is defined by the rapid development of organ(s) failure(s) associated with high rates of early (28-day) mortality in patients with cirrhosis. ACLF has been categorized into three grades of increasing severity according to the nature and number of organ failures. In patients with grade 3 ACLF, 28-day mortality is >70%. While the definition of ACLF has been endorsed by European scientific societies, North American and Asian Pacific associations have proposed alternative definitions. A prognostic score called the CLIF-C ACLF score provides a more precise assessment of the prognosis of patients with ACLF. Although bacterial infections and variceal bleeding are common precipitating factors, no precipitating factor can be identified in almost 60% of patients with ACLF. There is increasing evidence that cirrhosis is a condition characterized by a systemic inflammatory state and occult infections or translocation of bacteria or bacterial products from the lumen of the GUT to the systemic circulation which could play a role in the development of ACLF. Simple and readily available variables to predict the occurrence of ACLF in patients with cirrhosis have been identified and high-risk patients need careful management. Whether prolonged administration of statins, rifaximin or albumin can prevent ACLF requires further study. Patients with organ(s) failure(s) may needed to be admitted to the ICU and there should be no hesitation in admitting patients with cirrhosis to the ICU. No benefit to survival was observed with albumin dialysis and rescue transplantation is the best option in the most severe patients. One-year post-transplant survival rates exceeding 70%-75% have been reported, including in patients with grade 3 ACLF but these patients were highly selected. Criteria have been proposed to define futile transplantation (too ill to be transplanted), but these criteria need to be refined to include age, comorbidities and frailty in addition to markers of disease severity.

Appraisal of Cardiac Ejection Fraction With Liver Disease Severity: Implication in Post-Liver Transplantation Mortality

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Enhanced sympathetic nervous activation and peripheral vasodilation in end-stage liver disease (ESLD) may limit the importance of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) as an influential prognosticator. We sought to understand the LVEF and cardiac dimensions in ESLD patients in order to define the LVEF threshold to predict all-cause mortality after liver transplantation (LT).

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Data were collected prospectively from the Asan LT Registry between 2008 and 2016, and outcomes were retrospectively reviewed. LVEF, end-diastolic volume index (EDVI), and end-diastolic elastance (Eed) were measured by preoperative echocardiography. Of 2,799 patients, 452 (16.2%) had LVEF ≤ 60%, with 29 (1.0%) having LVEF < 55% and 269 (9.6%) had LVEF ≥ 70%. Over a median of 5.4-year follow-up, 329 (11.8%) patients died: 104 (3.7%) died within 90 days. LVEF (range, 30%-81%) was directly proportionate to Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, an index of liver disease severity, in survivors but showed a fixed flat-line pattern in nonsurvivors (interaction P = 0.004 between groups), with lower EDVI (P = 0.013) and higher Eed (P = 0.001) in the MELD ≥ 20 group. Patients with LVEF ≤ 60% had higher 90-day (13% vs. 7.4%; log rank, P = 0.03) and median 5.4-year (26.7% vs. 16.2%; log rank, P = 0.003) mortality rates in the MELD ≥ 20 group, respectively, compared to those with LVEF > 60%. Specifically, in the MELD > 35 group, median 5.4-year mortality rate was 53.3% in patients with LVEF ≤ 60% versus 24% in those with LVEF > 60% (log rank P < 0.001). By contrast, mortality rates of LVEF ≤ 60% and > 60% were similar in the MELD < 20 group (log rank P = 0.817).

CONCLUSIONS

LVEF ≤ 60% is strongly associated with higher post-LT mortality rates in the MELD ≥ 20 group, indicating the need to appraise both LVEF and liver disease severity simultaneously. Enhanced diastolic elastance with low EDVI provides insights into pathogenesis of low LVEF in nonsurvivors with MELD ≥ 20.

Geographic Disparities in Liver Allocation and Distribution in the United States: Where Are We Now?

BACKGROUND

Equitable deceased donor liver allocation and distribution has remained a heated topic in transplant medicine. Despite the establishment of numerous policies, mixed reports regarding organ allocation persist.

METHODS

Patient data was obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing liver transplant database between January 2016 and September 2017. A total of 20,190 patients were included in the analysis. Of this number, 8790 transplanted patients had a median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of 25 (17-33), after a wait time of 129 (32-273) days. Patients were grouped into low MELD and high MELD regions using a score 25 as the cutoff.

RESULTS

Significant differences were noted between low and high MELD regions in ethnicity (white 77.4% vs 60.4%, Hispanic 8.1% vs 24.5%; P < .001) and highest level of education (grade school 4.8% vs 8.5%, Associate/Bachelor's degree 19% vs 15.7%, P < .001), respectively. Patients in high MELD regions were more likely to be multiply listed if they had a diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (12.1% vs 15%, P = .046). Wait-list mortality (4.8% vs 6%, P < .001) and wait-list time (110 [27-238] vs 156 [42-309] days, P < .001) were greater in the high MELD regions.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlight some of the existing disparities in the recently updated allocation and distribution policy of deceased donor livers. Our findings are consistent with previous work and support the liver distribution policy revision.

Approaches for patients with very high MELD scores

In the era of the "sickest first" policy, patients with very high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores have been increasingly admitted to the intensive care unit with the expectation that they will receive a liver transplant (LT) in the absence of improvement on supportive therapies. Such patients are often admitted in a context of acute-on-chronic liver failure with extrahepatic failures. Sequential assessment of scores or classification based on organ failures within the first days after admission help to stratify the risk of mortality in this population. Although the prognosis of severely ill cirrhotic patients has recently improved, transplant-free mortality remains high. LT is still the only curative treatment in this population. Yet, the increased relative scarcity of graft resource must be considered alongside the increased risk of losing a graft in the initial postoperative period when performing LT in "too sick to transplant" patients. Variables associated with poor immediate post-LT outcomes have been identified in large studies. Despite this, the performance of scores based on these variables is still insufficient. Consideration of a patient's comorbidities and frailty is an appealing predictive approach in this population that has proven of great value in many other diseases. So far, local expertise remains the last safeguard to LT. Using this expertise, data are accumulating on favourable post-LT outcomes in very high MELD populations, particularly when LT is performed in a situation of stabilization/improvement of organ failures in selected candidates. The absence of "definitive" contraindications and the control of "dynamic" contraindications allow a "transplantation window" to be defined. This window must be identified swiftly after admission given the poor short-term survival of patients with very high MELD scores. In the absence of any prospect of LT, withdrawal of care could be discussed to ensure respect of patient life, dignity and wishes.

Effects of Allocating Livers for Transplantation Based on Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium Scores on Patient Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Model for End-stage Liver Disease and Sodium (MELD-Na) score was introduced for liver allocation in January 2016. We evaluated the effects of liver allocation, based on MELD-Na score, on waitlist and post-transplantation outcomes.

METHODS

We examined 2 patient groups from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry; the MELD-period group was composed of patients who were registered as transplant candidates from June 18, 2013 through January 10, 2016 (n = 18,850) and the MELD-Na period group was composed of patients who were registered from January 11, 2016 through September 30, 2017 (n = 14,512). We compared waitlist and post-transplantation outcomes and association with serum sodium concentrations between groups.

RESULTS

Mortality within 90 days on the liver waitlist decreased (hazard ratio [HR] 0.738, P < .001) and transplantation probability increased significantly (HR 1.217, P < .001) in the MELD-Na period. Although mild, moderate, and severe hyponatremia (130-134, 125-129, and <125 mmol/L) were independent risk factors for waitlist mortality in the MELD period (HR 1.354, 1.762, and 2.656; P < .001, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively) compared with the reference standard (135-145 mmol/L), these adverse outcomes were decreased in the MELD-Na period (HR 1.092, 1.271 and 1.374; P = .27, P = .018, and P = .037, respectively). The adjusted survival benefit of transplant recipients vs patients placed on the waitlist in the same score categories was definitive for patients with MELD-Na scores of 21-23 in the MELD-Na era (HR 0.336, P < .001) compared with MELD scores of 15-17 in the MELD era (HR 0.365, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver allocation based on MELD-Na score successfully improved waitlist outcomes and provided significant benefit to hyponatremic patients. Given the discrepancy in transplantation survival benefit, the current rules for liver allocation might require revision.

Impact of a Transplantation Critical Care Model on Short-Term Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation in High Acuity Patients: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is the definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Patients with high acuity ESLD are frequently denied life-saving OLT by transplant centers due to reported inferior outcomes. We sought to analyze the impact of a specialized transplant critical care model (TCCM) on patient access to OLT and survival outcomes in high acuity patients.

METHODS

From January 2009 to December 2016, 122 adults were wait-listed at our transplant center with laboratory Model for ESLD ≥35 or Status I. Outcomes in Era I (prior to TCCM) were compared to Era II (TCCM established October 1, 2012).

RESULTS

Era II (TCCM) led to a significant increase in patients' access to OLT. Frequency and need to seek OLT at another center dropped 4-fold in Era II. Compared to Era I, the majority of patients in Era II required intensive care unit management (22% vs 83%, P < .01) and renal replacement therapy (11% vs 70%, P < .01) prior to OLT. Despite a higher acuity of illness in Era II, 1-year patient survival was comparable (89% Era I, 80% Era II, P = .35).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a specialized TCCM expanded OLT access to high acuity patients, reduced the need to seek higher level of care elsewhere, and achieved excellent short-term post-transplant survival outcomes.

Management of patients with liver diseases on the waiting list for transplantation: a major impact to the success of liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The results of liver transplantation are excellent, with survival rates of over 90 and 80% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. The success of liver transplantation has led to an increase in the indications for liver transplantation. Generally, priorities are given to cirrhotic patients with a high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score on the principle of the sickest first and to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the principle of priority points according to the size and number of nodules of HCC. These criteria can lead to a 'competition' on the waiting list between the above patients and those who are cirrhotic and have an intermediate MELD score or with life-threatening liver diseases not well described by the MELD score. For this latter group of patients, 'MELD exception' points can be arbitrarily given.

DISCUSSION

The management of patients on the waiting list is of prime importance to avoid death and drop out from the waiting list as well as to improve post-transplant survival rates. For the more severe cases who may swiftly access liver transplantation, it is essential to rapidly determine whether liver transplantation is indeed indicated, and to organise a fast workup ahead of this. It is also essential to identify the ideal timing for liver transplantation in order to minimise mortality rates. For patients with HCC, a bridge therapy is frequently required to avoid progression of HCC and to maintain patients within the criteria of liver transplantation as well as to reduce the risk of post-transplant recurrence of HCC. For patients with cirrhosis and intermediate MELD score, waiting time can exceed 1 year; therefore, regular follow-up and management are essential to maintain the patient alive on the waiting list and to achieve a good survival after liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

There is a diversity of patients on the waiting list for transplantation and equity should be preserved between those with cirrhosis of high and intermediate severity and those with HCC. The management of patients on the waiting list is an essential component of the success of liver transplantation.

Review fantastic medical implications of 3D-printing in liver surgeries, liver regeneration, liver transplantation and drug hepatotoxicity testing: A review

The epidemiological trend in liver diseases becomes more serious worldwide. Several recent articles published by International Journal of Surgery in 2018 particularly emphasized the encouraging clinical benefits of hepatectomy, liver regeneration and liver transplantation, however, there are still many technical bottlenecks underlying these therapeutic approaches. Remarkably, a few preliminary studies have shown some clues to the role of three-dimensional (3D) printing in improving traditional therapy for liver diseases. Here, we concisely elucidated the curative applications of 3D-printing (no cells) and 3D Bio-printing (with hepatic cells), such as 3D-printed patient-specific liver models and devices for medical education, surgical simulation, hepatectomy and liver transplantation, 3D Bio-printed hepatic constructs for liver regeneration and artificial liver, 3D-printed liver tissues for evaluating drug's hepatotoxicity, and so on. Briefly, 3D-printed liver models and bioactive tissues may facilitate a lot of key steps to cure liver disorders, predictably bringing promising clinical benefits. This work further provides novel insights into facilitating treatment of hepatic carcinoma, promoting liver regeneration both in vivo and in vitro, expanding transplantable liver resources, maximizing therapeutic efficacy as well as minimizing surgical complications, medical hepatotoxicity, operational time, economic costs, etc.

A Specialized Transplantation Critical Care Model: Expanding Liver Transplantation Access to High-Acuity Patients

The current organ crisis has led to prolonged waiting times for liver transplantation, the progression of liver disease, and the subsequent increase in severity of illness. High acuity patients in need of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) maybe denied access to life-saving transplantation due to perceived poor outcomes after OLT and severe comorbid conditions. Recent studies demonstrated the highest survival benefit and acceptable post-OLT outcomes in high-acuity patients. This article provides an overview of a transplantation critical care model to increase liver transplantation access and optimize post-OLT outcomes in high-acuity patients.