Results of Liver Transplants From Donors Aged 70 Plus: Analysis of Andalusian Transplant Register

Influence of donor age on liver transplantation outcomes: A multivariate analysis and comparative study

BACKGROUND

The growing disparity between the rising demand for liver transplantation (LT) and the limited availability of donor organs has prompted a greater reliance on older liver grafts. Traditionally, utilizing livers from elderly donors has been associated with outcomes inferior to those achieved with grafts from younger donors. By accounting for additional risk factors, we hypothesize that the utilization of older liver grafts has a relatively minor impact on both patient survival and graft viability.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of donor age on LT outcomes using multivariate analysis and comparing young and elderly donor groups.

METHODS

In the period from April 2013 to December 2018, 656 adult liver transplants were performed at the University Hospital Merkur. Several multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were developed to independently assess the significance of donor age. Donor age was treated as a continuous variable. The approach involved univariate and multivariate analysis, including variable selection and assessment of interactions and transformations. Additionally, to exemplify the similarity of using young and old donor liver grafts, the group of 87 recipients of elderly donor liver grafts (≥ 75 years) was compared to a group of 124 recipients of young liver grafts (≤ 45 years) from the dataset. Survival rates of the two groups were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was used to test the differences between groups.

RESULTS

Using multivariate Cox analysis, we found no statistical significance in the role of donor age within the constructed models. Even when retained during the entire model development, the donor age's impact on survival remained insignificant and transformations and interactions yielded no substantial effects on survival. Consistent insignificance and low coefficient values suggest that donor age does not impact patient survival in our dataset. Notably, there was no statistical evidence that the five developed models did not adhere to the proportional hazards assumption. When comparing donor age groups, transplantation using elderly grafts showed similar early graft function, similar graft (P = 0.92), and patient survival rates (P = 0.86), and no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Our center's experience indicates that donor age does not play a significant role in patient survival, with elderly livers performing comparably to younger grafts when accounting for other risk factors.

Utilization of elderly donors in liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A national retrospective cohort study of China

BACKGROUND

Profound organ shortages worldwide have led to the increased utilization of marginal organs from older individuals. However, the effectiveness of liver transplantation (LT) with organs from elderly donors for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. The objective of the current study was to assess the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with HCC following LT using grafts from deceased donors over 60 years old.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with HCC who underwent LT between 2015 and 2018 were identified in the China Liver Transplant Registry database. The overall survival and disease-free survival of older liver donors (OLDs) were compared with those of younger liver donors (YLDs) after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

From January 2015 to December 2018, a total of 4971 HCC patients were enrolled in the study according to the screening criteria. The absolute and relative utilization of liver grafts from elderly patients over 60 years for HCC patients increased every year, from 65 (9.3%) in 2015 to 268 (14.5%) in 2018. Disease-free survival (DFS) was significantly lower in HCC patients with elderly donors (both P < 0.05) after propensity score matching. The OLD group had worse DFS than YLD group if patients had tumors beyond the Milan criteria (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of older donors for LT has been growing quickly in the last few years in China. Grafts from older donors can be safely used in HCC recipients with similar OS and comparable perioperative complications. However, further investigation into whether older donor has an impact on recurrence is warranted, especially among those with tumors beyond the Milan criteria.

Grafts from selected deceased donors over 80 years old can safely expand the number of liver transplants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present the outcome of deceased adult liver transplantation from octogenarian (≥80 years old) donors compared to younger grafts.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on six databases to identify all available original papers that report the outcome of adult recipients who underwent liver transplantation from a deceased octogenarian donor.

RESULTS

Overall, 39,034 liver transplantations from 12 studies were reported with 789 (2.02%) cases receiving grafts from octogenarian donors. Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference regarding the one, three, and five-year graft and patient survival between the recipients of livers <80 years old and octogenarian grafts. There were significantly more episodes of biliary complications in the recipients of octogenarian grafts (34/459; 7.4%) in comparison to the recipients of livers <80 years old (372/37074; 1.0%) (OR 0.53; 95% CI = 0.35-0.81; P 0.004; I² = 0%). The incidence of primary non-function, vascular complications and re-transplantation did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and medium-term graft and patient survival of octogenarian liver transplantation is not inferior compared to the liver transplantation with younger grafts, however with a higher rate of biliary complications.

Graft Risk Index After Liver Transplant: Internal and External Validation of a New Spanish Indicator

OBJECTIVES

Scarcity of liver grafts has led to the use of marginal donors, consequently increasing the number of complications posttransplant. To prevent this situation, several indicators have been developed. However, important differences remain among countries. Here, we compared an early-risk liver transplant indicator based on the Spanish Liver Transplant Registry, called the Graft Risk Index, versus the US donor risk index and the Eurotransplant donor risk index.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The new indicator was based on prospectively collected data from 600 adult liver transplants performed in our center. We considered 2 events to compare the indexes: graft survival and rejection-free graft survival, with Cox proportional regression for analyses. Power to predict graft survival was evaluated by calculating the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve.

RESULTS

We found no differences between the US and Eurotransplant donor risk indexes in prediction of patients with and without early graft failure. With regard to early survival, only the Graft Risk Index allowed better survival discrimination, in which survival progressively decreased with values ≥ 3 (with probability of graft survival at 1 month of 68%; 95% confidence interval, 46.2-82.5). This increase in risk was significant compared with the standard group (hazard ratio of 10.15; 95% confidence interval, C 3.91- 26.32; P < .001). We calculated powers of prediction of 0.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.62), 0.54 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.65), and 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.77) for donor risk index, Eurotransplant donor risk index, and early Graft Risk Index, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the US donor risk index nor the Eurotransplant donor risk index was valid for our Spanish liver donation and transplant program. Therefore, an indicator to predict posttransplant graft survival that is adapted to our environment is necessary. This national Graft Risk Index can be a useful tool to optimize donor-recipient matching.

Recipient Selection for Optimal Utilization of Discarded Grafts in Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

In France, liver grafts that have been refused by at least 5 teams are considered for rescue allocation (RA), with the choice of the recipient being at the team's discretion. Although this system permits the use of otherwise discarded grafts in a context of organ shortage, outcomes and potential benefits need to be assessed.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2015, outcomes of RA grafts (n = 33) were compared with SA grafts (n = 321) at a single French center.

RESULTS

Liver grafts in the RA group were older (63 ± 17 years vs 54 ± 18 years, P = 0.007) and had a higher DRI (1.86 ± 0.45 vs 1.61 ± 0.47, P = 0.010). Recipients in this group had a lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (14 ± 5 vs 22 ± 10, P < 0.001) and had mostly hepatocellular carcinoma (67.0% vs 40.4%, P = 0.010). The balance of risk score was significantly lower in the RA group (5.5 ± 2.9 vs 9.2 ± 5.5, P < 0.001). There were higher rates of early and delayed hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2% vs 3.1%, P = 0.001) and retransplantation (18.2% vs 4.7%, P = 0.002) in the RA group. Patient survival was not different between groups, but graft survival was impaired (95% vs 82% at 1 year and 94% vs 74% at 3 years, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that discarded liver grafts can be used provided that there is a strict recipient selection process, although hepatic artery thrombosis and retransplantation are more frequent. This strategy enables utilization of otherwise discarded grafts in the context of organ shortage.

Actual Risk of Using Very Aged Donors for Unselected Liver Transplant Candidates: A European Single-center Experience in the MELD Era

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the whole experience of liver transplantation (LT) with donors ≥70 years in a single center not applying specific donor/recipient matching criteria.

BACKGROUND

LT with very old donors has historically been associated with poorer outcomes. With the increasing average donor age and the advent of Model for End-stage Liver Diseases (MELD) score-based allocation criteria, an optimal donor/recipient matching is often unsuitable.

METHODS

Outcomes of all types of LTs were compared according to 4 study groups: patients transplanted between 1998 and 2003 with donors <70 (group 1, n = 396) or ≥70 years (group 2, n = 88); patients transplanted between 2004 and 2010 with donors <70 (group 3, n = 409), or ≥70 years (group 4, n = 190). From 2003, graft histology was routinely available before cross-clamping, and MELD-driven allocation was adopted.

RESULTS

Groups 1 and 2 were similar for main donor and recipient variables, and surgical details. Group 4 had shorter donor ICU stay, lower rate of moderate-to-severe graft macrosteatosis (2.3% vs 8%), and higher recipient MELD score (22 vs 19) versus group 3. After 2003, median donor age, recipient age, and MELD score significantly increased, whereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased. Five-year graft survival was 63.6% in group 1 versus 59.1% in group 2 (P = 0.252) and 70.9% in group 3 versus 67.6% in group 4 (P = 0.129). Transplants performed between 1998 and 2003, recipient HCV infection, balance of risk score >18, and pre-LT renal replacement treatments were independently associated with worse graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Even without specific donor/recipient matching criteria, the outcomes of LT with donors ≥70 and <70 years are comparable with appropriate donor management.

Liver Transplantation Results by Donor Age

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare liver transplantation outcomes as a function of donor age.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed 212 liver transplantations between 2008 and 2014. We described a prospective cohort study and grouped the patients by liver donor age. We compared quantitative and categorical variables using statistical analysis.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found among any graft age groups in gender (always more males), time on waiting list, age, height, Child Pugh Turcotte (CHILD) score, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, need for intraoperative blood products, or intensive care unit stay. The most frequent etiology of liver failure was alcohol. A brain-dead donor was the most frequent type in all groups. The whole graft was used except in 4 cases. No statistically significant differences were found among groups in the surgical technique, postreperfusion syndrome, arterial complications, biliary complications, venous complications, acute rejection, and retransplantation. The 3-year patient survival rate was 64% in the <60-year graft age group, 48% in the 60- to 69-year group, 64% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .264). The 3-year graft survival rate was 62% in the <60-year graft age group, 47% in the 60- to 69-year group, 65% in the 70- to 79-year group, and 40% in the ≥80-year group (P = .295).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the need to increase the pool of liver donors, older donors should be considered as a source for liver transplantation, although careful selection is required.

Survival Outcomes in Liver Transplantation With Elderly Donors: Analysis of Andalusian Transplant Register

Recently, there has been a large discrepancy between the number of patients on the waiting list for a liver transplant and the availability of deceased donors, with an increase in annual wait list mortality rates. Elderly donor livers are thought to be marginal grafts; however, in recent years, their utilization has constantly increased. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utilization of elderly donors in Andalusia and post-transplant outcomes. This retrospective observational study of 2408 liver transplants, performed in Andalusia between 2000 and 2014, analyzes the outcomes from donors aged 70 plus (n = 423) in terms of survival rates of the graft and the recipient, the type of transplant, donor age, and D-MELD score (product of donor age and preoperative Model for End-stage Liver Disease score). The most frequent indications for transplant were alcoholic cirrhosis (49.2%), hepatitis C cirrhosis (13%), and hepatocellular carcinoma (12.5%). The overall survival at 5 years was 64%, with a significant fall in survival for recipients with a D-MELD greater than 1500 (57%; P = .045). In the 70-year-old-plus donor group, the overall patient survival was 58.4%. The retransplant rate increased proportionately with donor age. In the alcoholic cirrhosis recipient subgroup, the overall survival at 5 years was 67.6% (P < .05) compared with 33.5% in patients with hepatitis C. Use of elderly donors is a safe strategy to reduce the scarcity of donors, provided that a D-MELD score below 1500 is obtained. Retransplant rates increase progressively with donor age. It is necessary to carefully screen recipients of older organs, taking into account that the best results are obtained for alcoholic cirrhosis, negative viral load hepatitis C, and a D-MELD score below 1500.

Liver Transplantation With Older Donors: A Comparison With Younger Donors in a Context of Organ Shortage

BACKGROUND

Older liver grafts have been considered in the past decade due to organ shortage. The aim was to compare outcomes after liver transplantation with either younger or older donors.

METHODS

Patients transplanted in our center between 2004 and 2014 with younger donors (younger than 60 years; n = 253) were compared with older donors (older than 75 years; n = 157). Multiorgan transplantations, split grafts, or non-heart-beating donors were not included.

RESULTS

Donors in the older group were mostly women deceased from stroke, and only 3 patients had experienced cardiac arrest. Liver tests were significantly better in the older group than in the younger group. There was no difference regarding cold ischemia time, model for end-stage liver disease score, and steatosis. There was no significant difference regarding primary nonfunction and dysfunction, hepatic artery and biliary complications, and retransplantation rates. Graft survival was not different (65% and 64% in the older and younger groups, P = 0.692). Within the older group, hepatitis C infection, retransplantation, and emergency transplantation were associated with poor graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Provided normal liver tests and the absence of cardiac arrest in donors, older liver grafts (>75 years) may be safely attributed to non-hepatitis C-infected recipients in the setting of a first and nonurgent transplantation.

Liver Transplantation Using Donation After Brain and Cardiac Death: A Single-Center Experience in China

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LTx) using donation after brain and cardiac death (DBCD) has increased steadily in China. The aims of this study were to evaluate the outcomes of DBCD LTx and to assess its feasibility to expand the donor pool.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical characteristics of DBCD donors and recipients, survival of allografts and recipients, and prognostic factors in DBCD LTx recipients from March 2010 to December 2014 in our institution.

RESULTS

DBCD LTx (n = 102) were performed in our institution during the research period, and the successful donation rate was 26.0%. Mean warm ischemia time and cold ischemia time were 14.39 minutes and 5.29 hours, respectively. The overall and biliary complication rates were 45.1% and 16.7%, respectively. Donor age (P = .043), intra-operative blood loss (P = .048), and operation time (P = .045) were significantly different between the complication and non-complication groups. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates of patients and grafts were 88.0%, 84.6%, 84.6%, and 85.7%, 78.6%, and 78.6%, respectively. The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates of hepatocellular carcinoma patients were 91.9% and 80.5%, respectively whereas the recurrence-free survival rates were 84.9% and 77.2%, respectively. The patient and graft survival rates were not statistically different between the <55-year and ≥55 year groups, but complication rate was higher in the older group than in the younger group (P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of DBCD LTx is favorable in our institution, with careful donor and recipient selection and careful peri-operative management. DBCD is an optimized solution for organ shortage in today's China.

Impact of elderly donors for liver transplantation: A single-center experience

Elderly donor grafts for liver transplantation (LT) are recognized to be marginal grafts. The present study investigated the impact of using elderly donors for LT. Between June 1990 and August 2012, 1631 patients received LT at Kyoto University Hospital. Out of 1631 patients, 1597 patients received living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), whereas the other 34 patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Seventy-five grafts that were used came from individuals who were ≥60 years old. We retrospectively analyzed the recipients' survival rates according to donor age. The overall survival rates of the recipients of all LDLT (P < 0.001), adult-to-adult LDLT (P = 0.007), all DDLT (P = 0.026), and adult-to-adult DDLT (P = 0.011) were significantly lower for the elderly donor group versus the younger group and especially for those who were hepatitis C-positive. A multivariate analysis revealed that donor age, ABO incompatibility, and preoperative intensive care unit stay were independent risk factors for poor patient survival in adult-to-adult LDLT. However, no significant differences existed between the 2 groups among those who received adult-to-adult LDLT in and after April 2006. No significant association was found between donor age and incidence of acute cellular rejection. In conclusion, donor age was closely related to the survival rate for LDLT and DDLT, although the impact of donor age was not shown in the recent cases.