ABO-incompatible liver transplantation in acute liver failure: a single Portuguese center study. Transplant Proc. 2013;45:1110-1115. [PMID: 23622639 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2013.02.012]

Strategies for ABO Incompatible Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is a definitive treatment for the decompensated liver cirrhosis and fulminant liver failure. With limited availability of cadaveric liver allograft, ABO incompatible (ABOi) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) plays an important part in further expansion of donor pool. Over the years, with the introduction of Rituximab and improving desensitisation protocol, outcomes of ABOi LDLT are on par with ABO compatible LT. However, ABOi LDLT protocol varies markedly from centre to centre. Intravenous Rituximab followed by plasmapheresis or immunoadsorption effectively reduce ABO isoagglutinins titre before transplant, thereby reducing the risk of antibody mediated rejection in the post-transplant period. Local infusion therapy and splenectomy are not used routinely at most of the centres in Rituximab era. Post-transplant immunosuppression usually consists of standard triple drug regime, and tacrolimus trough levels are targeted at higher level compared to ABO compatible LT. Introduction of newer therapies like Belatacept and Obinutuzumab hold promise to further improve outcomes and reduce the risk of antibody mediated rejection related complications. ABOi LT in emergency situations like acute liver failure and deceased donor LT is challenging due to limited time period for desensitisation protocol before transplant, and available evidence are still limited but encouraging.

When Push Comes to Shove! Emergency ABO-Incompatible Pediatric Living Donor Liver Transplant for Acute Wilson's Disease

ABO-incompatible living donor liver transplantation (ABOi-LDLT) is on the rise as a viable option in countries with limited access to deceased donor grafts. While reported outcomes of ABOi-LT in children are similar to ABO- Compatible liver transplant (ABOc-LT), most children beyond 1-2 years of age will need desensitization to overcome the immunological barrier of incompatible blood groups. The current standard protocol for desensitization is Rituximab that targets B lymphocytes and is given 2-3 weeks prior to LT. However, this timeline may not be feasible in children requiring emergency LT for acute liver failure (ALF) or acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). In this emergency situation of ABOi-LT, a safe multipronged approach may be an acceptable alternative solution. We report a child with acute Wilson's disease with rapidly deteriorating liver function who underwent a successful ABOi-LDLT using a rapid desensitization protocol.

Quick preparation of ABO-incompatible living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure

Acute liver failure is life-threatening and has to be treated by liver transplantation urgently. When deceased donors or ABO-compatible living donors are not available, ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) becomes the only choice. How to prepare ABO-I LDLT urgently is an unsolved issue. A quick preparation regimen was designed, which was consisted of bortezomib (3.5 mg) injection to deplete plasma cells and plasma exchange to achieve isoagglutinin titer ≤ 1: 64 just prior to liver transplantation and followed by rituximab (375 mg/m2 ) on post-operative day 1 to deplete B-cells. Eight patients received this quick preparation regimen to undergo ABO-I LDLT for acute liver failure from 2012 to 2019. They aged between 50 and 60 years. The median MELD score was 39 with a range from 35 to 48. It took 4.75 ± 1.58 days to prepare such an urgent ABO-I LDLT. All the patients had successful liver transplantations, but one patient died of antibody-mediated rejection at post-operative month 6. The 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year graft/patient survival were 100%, 87.5%, and 75%, respectively. In conclusion, this quick preparation regimen can reduce isoagglutinin titers quickly and make timely ABO-I LDLT feasible for acute liver failure.

Excellent outcome following emergency deceased donor ABO-incompatible liver transplantation using rituximab and antigen specific immunoadsorption

BACKGROUND

The acceptance of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) liver grafts will expand the donor pool for a patient in urgent need for a liver transplantation (LT). Here we report our results with emergency ABOi DD (deceased donor) LT using rituximab and antigen specific immunoadsorption.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

2009 to 2019 we performed 20 ABOi DD LTs (adults n = 17, children n = 3) for patients in urgent need for a LT. Immunosuppression consisted of rituximab (n = 20) and basiliximab (n = 15) or anti-thymocyte globuline (n = 4), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG; n = 6), tacrolimus, prednisolone and mycophenolate mofetil. Fifteen patients were treated with IA (n = 14) or both IA and plasmapheresis (PP; n = 1) pre-transplant and 18 patients were treated with IA (n = 15) or both IA and PP (n = 3) post-transplant. The median pre-transplant MELD- score was 40 (range 18-40). Patient and graft survival and complications were compared to a 1:4 case matched control group of ABO-identical or compatible (ABOid/c) DDLT.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3- and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 85, 85 and 78% for the ABOi recipients and not significantly different compared to ABOid/c controls. Only one ABOi patient developed antibody-mediated rejection.

CONCLUSION

Patient and graft survival after emergency ABOi DDLT using rituximab and immunoadorption was equal to ABOid/DDLT. ABOi DD LT was a successful approach to expand the donor pool for patients in urgent need for a liver graft.

Clinical Relevance of Isoagglutinin Rebound in Adult ABO-Incompatible Living Donor Liver Transplantation

ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) can be performed successfully. However, anti-ABO isoagglutinin rebound may cause antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and graft loss. The risk threshold of isoagglutinin rebound is still not defined. 76 ABO-I LDLT recipients were divided into group A (n = 56) with low isoagglutinin titers (<1:256), and group B (n = 20) with high isoagglutinin titers (≥1:256), at initial assessment for liver transplantation. The last 12 patients in group B received a modified desensitization regimen by adding bortezomib to deplete plasma cells. Six (10.7%) patients in group A and 10 (50.0%) patients in group B had postoperative isoagglutinin rebound (p < 0.001). Three patients (5.54%) in group A and two patients (10%) in group B developed clinical AMR (p = 0.602). The cutoff value of postoperative isoagglutinin rebound to cause clinical AMR was ≥1:1024. Among the 12 patients in group B with bortezomib administration, isoagglutinin rebounded up to 1:128 only, and no clinical AMR occurred. In conclusion, the patients with high isoagglutinin titers had a higher rate of postoperative isoagglutinin rebound. Isoagglutinin rebound ≥1:1024 is risky for developing clinical AMR. Adding bortezomib into the desensitization regimen may mitigate isoagglutinin rebound, and avoid clinical AMR.

Long-term outcomes of emergency ABO-incompatible living donor liver transplantation using a modified desensitization protocol for highly sensitized patients with acute liver failure: A case report

Although there is no established desensitization protocol for liver transplantation (LT), desensitization usually entails treatment with rituximab, plasmapheresis, splenectomy, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) infusion together with a local graft. The desensitization protocol is usually initiated 2 to 3 weeks before transplantation. Therefore, patients with acute liver failure warranting urgent LT are usually ineligible for ABO-incompatible (ABOi) LT. For these reasons, several attempts have been made to abridge the desensitization protocol and extend the indication for ABOi living donor LT (LDLT). Here we report a 40-year-old female diagnosed with chronic hepatitis B and acute-on-chronic liver failure (model for end-stage liver disease score, 31). In the absence of a suitable compatible liver donor, emergency ABOi LT was planned using a modified desensitization protocol. The preoperative isoagglutinin (IA) titer was 1 : 1,024 and the preoperative T- and B-cell cross-matches were positive. The patient received a single dose of rituximab (375 mg/m²) and IVIG (0.8 g/kg) was administered from the anhepatic phase until three days after transplantation. Although the patient developed acute cellular rejection in the early stages after LT, she has maintained a stable graft function, even after 5 years. In summary, a modified desensitization protocol consisting of rituximab and IVIG is a feasible strategy for highly sensitized patients with elevated IA titers indicated for urgent LDLT.

ABO-Incompatible Liver Transplantation - A Review of the Historical Background and Results

ABO-incompatible liver transplantation (ABOi LT) using conventional immunosuppression has been considered a contraindication due to the high risk for antibody-mediated complications potentially resulting in graft loss. However, organ shortage has led to the development of anti-A/B antibody reducing immunosuppressive protocols which have made the outcome after living donor (LD) ABOi LT equivalent to that achieved with LD ABO-compatible (ABOc). The experience of deceased donor (DD) ABOi LT is however still limited. In this article, we discuss the historical background and the results after ABOi LT, in the setting of both LD and DD transplantation. We also discuss the remaining hurdles and future strategies in the breaching of the ABO barrier for LT.

Recent advances in ABO incompatible liver transplantation

Liver transplantation has become the best way to cure patients with end-stage liver disease. Due to the shortage of donor organs worldwide and being unable to obtain matched donor liver, most patients with severe hepatic failure lose the chance of operation or even die. As a result, ABO incompatible (ABO-I) liver transplantation has become a choice to save the endangered life. However, compared with ABO compatible liver transplantation, ABO-I liver transplantation is more prone to cause severe antibody mediated rejection (AMR), biliary complications, infection, thrombotic microangiopathy, and acute kidney injury. Consequently, its clinical application is limited. In recent years, with the progress of AMR prevention strategies such as immunoabsorption, plasmapheresis, rituximab, splenectomy, intravenous immunoglobulin, and graft perfusion, the clinical efficacy of ABO-I liver transplantation has been significantly improved, although it still faces the challenge of how to prevent and control AMR and postoperative complications.

Simultaneous ABO-incompatible living-donor liver transplantation and splenectomy without plasma exchange in China: Two case reports

ABO-incompatible (ABO-i) living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is performed if an ABO-compatible graft cannot be obtained. However, a perfect desensitization protocol has not been established worldwide, especially for simultaneous ABO-i LDLT and splenectomy. We herein report two cases of ABO-i LDLT. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of ABO-i LDLT in an adult patient in China. Splenectomy and T-cell-targeted immunosuppression (basiliximab) was used to overcome the blood group barrier in these recipients. The patients had good graft function without signs of antibody-mediated rejection throughout the 12-month follow-up. Thus, ABO-i LDLT with splenectomy is undoubtedly life-saving when an ABO-compatible graft cannot be obtained for patients in critical condition.

ABO-Incompatible Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Focus of Antibody Rebound

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an option to expand the donor organ pool for patients with life-threatening diseases who cannot be supplied with a cadaver organ. Next to the donor risks, complications after ABO-incompatible LDLT (ABOi LDLT) in the recipient are subject to controversial discussion. Improvement in ABOi graft survival rates have been achieved with plasma treatment procedures (PTP) and immunosuppression but antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and graft loss still occur.

METHODS

Since 2008, we have prepared 10 patients for ABOi LDLT. Seven of the 10 patients for transplantation had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

RESULTS

All patients underwent PTP before and after ABOi LDLT as well as immunosuppression according to the treatment schedule. We did not use anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in the transplant setting. We transplanted 6 of 10 preconditioned patients. After 3 years, 5 of the 6 transplanted patients were still alive.

CONCLUSION

Even if B-cell depletion with anti-CD 20 treatment in the setting of ABOi LDLT is commonly accepted, our center successfully administered only quadruple drug immunosuppression combined with PTP. Especially patients with HCC had a high titer increment also pre-transplantation and were at high risk for arterial thrombosis and graft loss.

Current techniques for AB0-incompatible living donor liver transplantation

For a long time, it was considered medical malpractice to neglect the blood group system during transplantation. Because there are far more patients waiting for organs than organs available, a variety of attempts have been made to transplant AB0-incompatible (AB0i) grafts. Improvements in AB0i graft survival rates have been achieved with immunosuppression regimens and plasma treatment procedures. Nevertheless, some grafts are rejected early after AB0i living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) due to antibody mediated rejection or later biliary complications that affect the quality of life. Therefore, the AB0i LDLT is an option only for emergency situations, and it requires careful planning. This review compares the treatment possibilities and their effect on the patients’ graft outcome from 2010 to the present. We compared 11 transplant center regimens and their outcomes. The best improvement, next to plasma treatment procedures, has been reached with the prophylactic use of rituximab more than one week before AB0i LDLT. Unfortunately, no standardized treatment protocols are available. Each center treats its patients with its own scheme. Nevertheless, the transplant results are homogeneous. Due to refined treatment strategies, AB0i LDLT is a feasible option today and almost free of severe complications.

Liver transplantation with deceased ABO-incompatible donors is life-saving but associated with increased risk of rejection and post-transplant complications

ABO-incompatible (ABOi) liver transplantation (LT) with deceased donor organs is performed occasionally when no ABO-compatible (ABOc) graft is available. From 1996 to 2011, 61 ABOi LTs were performed in Oslo and Gothenburg. Median patient age was 51 years (range 13-75); 33 patients were transplanted on urgent indications, 13 had malignancy-related indications, and eight received ABOi grafts for urgent retransplantations. Median donor age was 55 years (range 10-86). Forty-four patients received standard triple immunosuppression with steroids, tacrolimus, and mycophenolate mofetil, and forty-four patients received induction with IL-2 antagonist or anti-CD20 antibody. Median follow-up time was 29 months (range 0-200). The 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of patient survival (PS) and graft survival (GS) were 85/71%, 79/57%, 75/55%, and 59/51%, respectively, compared to 90/87%, 84/79%, 79/73%, and 65/60% for all other LT recipients in the same period. The 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year GS for A2 grafts were 81%, 67%, 62%, and 57%, respectively. In conclusion, ABOi LT performed with non-A2 grafts is associated with inferior graft survival and increased risk of rejection, vascular and biliary complications. ABOi LT with A2 grafts is associated with acceptable graft survival and can be used safely in urgent cases.

Intravenous immunoglobulins in liver transplant patients: Perspectives of clinical immune modulation

Shortage of appropriate donor grafts is the foremost current problem in organ transplantation. As a logical consequence, waiting times have extended and pretransplant mortality rates were significantly increasing. The implementation of a priority-based liver allocation system using the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score helped to reduce waiting list mortality in liver transplantation (LT). However, due to an escalating organ scarcity, pre-LT MELD scores have significantly increased and liver recipients became more complex in recent years. This has finally led to posttransplant decreasing survival rates, attributed mainly to elevated rates of infectious and immunologic complications. To meet this challenging development, an increasing number of extended criteria donor grafts are currently accepted, which may, however, aggravate the patients’ infectious and immunologic risk profiles. The administration of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) is an established treatment in patients with immune deficiencies and other antibody-mediated diseases. In addition, IVIg was shown to be useful in treatment of several disorders caused by deterioration of the cellular immune system. It proved to be effective in preventing hyperacute rejection in highly sensitized kidney and heart transplants. In the liver transplant setting, the administration of specific Ig against hepatitis B virus is current standard in post-LT antiviral prophylaxis. The mechanisms of action of IVIg are complex and not fully understood. However, there is increasing experimental and clinical evidence that IVIg has an immuno-balancing impact by a combination of immuno-supporting and immuno-suppressive properties. It may be suggested that, especially in the context of a worsening organ shortage with all resulting clinical implications, liver transplant patients should benefit from immuno-regulatory capabilities of IVIg. In this review, perspectives of immune modulation by IVIg and impact on outcome in liver transplant patients are described.

Infliximab/Plasmapheresis in vanishing bile duct syndrome secondary to toxic epidermal necrolysis

Vanishing bile duct syndrome (VBDS) is a rare disorder characterized by loss of interlobular bile ducts and progressive worsening cholestasis. The acute presentation of this disease is typically associated with a drug hypersensitivity and Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). The mainstay of treatment has been ursodeoxycholic acid with mixed results from immunosuppressive regimens. Anti-tumor necrosis factor-α and plasmapheresis have been speculated to be of potential benefit. It is hoped that early identification and intervention in VBDS secondary to Stevens-Johnson syndrome/TEN with continued reporting will lead to better regimens and outcomes. Our case report details the first reported use of infliximab and plasmapheresis, in addition to steroids, in a patient with VBDS secondary to TEN, as well as a literature review that supports a mechanism for why these modalities could be effective treatments. Unfortunately, our patient died, and the use of these therapies had an unclear benefit on his liver and skin disease. We hope that additional work can be published to confirm or refute their utility in the treatment of these diseases.

A modified protocol with rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin in emergent ABO-incompatible liver transplantation for acute liver failure

BACKGROUND

The established procedure for ABO-incompatible liver transplantation (ABO-I LT) was too complicated to be used in case of emergency. We developed a protocol consisting of rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for ABO-I LT in patients with acute liver failure (ALF).

METHODS

The data from 101 patients who had undergone liver transplantation (LT) for ALF were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups: ABO-compatible liver transplantation group (ABO-C LT, n=66) and ABO-I LT group (n=35). All the patients in the ABO-I LT group received a single dose of rituximab (375 mg/m2) and IVIG (0.4 g/kg per day) at the beginning of the operation. IVIG was administered for 10 consecutive days after LT. Plasma exchange, splenectomy and graft local infusion were omitted in the protocol. Quadruple immunosuppressive therapy including basiliximab, corticosteroids, tacrolimus and mycophenolatemofetil was used to reinforce immunosuppression.

RESULTS

The 3-year cumulative patient survival rates in the ABO-I LT and ABO-C LT groups were 83.1% and 86.3%, respectively (P>0.05), and the graft survival rates were 80.0% and 86.3%, respectively (P>0.05). Two patients (5.7%) suffered from antibody-mediated rejection in the ABO-I LT group. Other complications such as acute cellular rejection, biliary complication and infection displayed no significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The simplified treatment consisting of rituximab and IVIG prevented antibody-mediated rejection for LT of blood-type incompatible patients. With this treatment, the patients did not need plasma exchange, splenectomy and graft local infusion. This treatment was safe and efficient for LT of the patients with ALF.

Liver transplantation for acute liver failure: are there thresholds not to be crossed?

Factors predicting survival after liver transplantation (LT) for irreversible acute liver failure (ALF) are rare. The aim of this study was to identify prognostic preoperative factors of patients with ALF that predict mortality after LT to avoid futile transplantation. From chart review, we identified 57 patients receiving transplants for ALF from 12/2000 to 09/2010. Recipient and donor data were analyzed and correlated with in-hospital mortality and patient survival by univariable/multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards. The survival rates at 30 days and 12 months were 77.2% and 64.9%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate was 29.8%. Follow-up of patients discharged from the hospital alive showed 30-day and 12-month survivals of 100% and 92.5%, respectively. Multivariable analysis of factors known preoperatively showed that the lowest pH of the recipient before LT (P = 0.03) was independently associated with in-hospital mortality, and the recipient's BMI (P = 0.03) and the lowest pH before LT (P = 0.03) were independently associated with patient survival. A pH of 7.26 was the calculated cutoff (ROC) for increased in-hospital mortality. Donor factors did not affect patient survival. Patients with ALF and a pH ≤ 7.26 have the worst outcome after liver transplantation. Therefore, emergency liver transplantation should be critically discussed for each individual.

Matching donor to recipient in liver transplantation: Relevance in clinical practice

Achieving optimum outcomes after liver transplantation requires an understanding of the interaction between donor, graft and recipient factors. Within the cohort of patients waiting for a transplant, better matching of the donor organ to the recipient will improve transplant outcomes and benefit the overall waiting list by minimizing graft failure and need for re-transplantation. A PubMed search was conducted to identify published literature investigating the effects of donor factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, viral serology; graft factors such as size and quality, recipient factors such as age, size, gender and transplant factors such as major or minor blood group incompatibility and immunological factors. We also report technical and therapeutic modifications that can be used to manage donor-recipient mismatch identified from literature and the authors’ clinical experience. Multiple donor and recipient factors impact graft survival after liver transplantation. Appropriate matching based on donor-organ-recipient variables, modification of surgical technique and innovative peri-transplant strategies can increase the donor pool by utilizing grafts from marginal donors that are traditionally turned down.