Organ sharing in the management of acute liver failure

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.

International collaboration and organ exchange in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Organ exchange among organ procurement organisations (OPOs) serves three main purposes: firstly, it reduces the loss of donor organs for which there is no suitable recipient on the waiting list of an OPO; secondly, it improves the odds of specific patient groups for receiving a matching donor organ; thirdly, it allows an optimised donor-recipient match, due to an expansion of the donor and recipient pool. However, only few published studies provide figures for the significance of international organ sharing. This study aims to assess the impact of organ imports on the Swiss transplant activity.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data related to international organ exchange and its impact on the Swiss transplant activity. Information about organs from deceased donors offered by foreign OPOs was extracted from the Swiss Organ Allocation System for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1028 organs were offered by foreign OPOs for allocation to patients needing transplantation in Switzerland. Of all organs offered, 35.9% originated from the Agence de la Biomédecine (France) and 25.6% from the National Health Service Blood and Transplant (United Kingdom). Totally 137 organs (13.3%) were accepted by the Swiss transplant centres for transplantation. These imported organs account for 7.2% of the transplants performed between 2009 and 2013. The impact of imported organs on the transplant activity was largest for the liver (14.2%), followed by heart (8.9%), lung (6.3%) and kidney (4.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that international organ exchange substantially contributed to the Swiss transplant activity during the period analysed. The collaboration between OPOs can be life-saving, especially for paediatric patients and selected adult transplant candidates. More patients might benefit from organ sharing if the standards for international collaboration could be further harmonised.

Experience with molecular adsorbent recirculating system treatment in 20 children listed for high-urgency liver transplantation

For more than 10 years, children at our national center for pediatric liver transplantation (LT) have been treated with Molecular Adsorbent Recirculating System (MARS) liver dialysis as a bridging therapy to high-urgency LT. Treatment was reserved for 20 patients with the highest degrees of hepatic encephalopathy (HE; median grade = 3.5). Death from neurological sequelae was considered imminent for these patients, and this was further reflected in significantly higher international normalized ratios and ammonia levels and worse prognostic liver indices (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease scores and liver injury units) in comparison with 32 wait-listed patients who did not receive MARS dialysis. MARS therapy was generally well tolerated, with a reduction in thrombocytes and hemorrhaging as the most common side effects. HE improvement was documented in 30% of the treated patients, but progression to grade IV encephalopathy occurred in 45% of the patients despite the treatment. Serum ammonia, bilirubin, bile acid, and creatinine levels significantly decreased during treatment. Eighty percent of MARS-treated patients survived to undergo LT, and their survival was equivalent to that of non-MARS-treated patients with severe liver failure (69%, P = 0.52). The heterogeneity between MARS-treated patients and non-MARS-treated patients in our cohort precluded a statistical evaluation of a benefit from MARS for patient survival. Our data demonstrate the safety of MARS even in the most severely ill patients awaiting LT, but strategies that promote the more rapid and widespread availability of high-quality donor organs remain of critical importance for improving patient survival in cases of severe acute liver failure.