Liver Transplantation in Recipients With High Model for End-stage Liver Disease Score

Risk evaluation and recipient selection in adult liver transplantation: A mixed-methods survey

Background:

Liver transplant (LT) is the definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease. Limited resources and important post-operative implications for recipients compel judicious risk stratification and patient selection. However, little is known about the factors influencing physicians’ assessment regarding patient selection for LT and risk evaluation.

Methods:

We conducted a mixed-methods, cross-sectional survey involving Canadian hepatologists, anesthesiologists, LT surgeons, and French anesthesiologists. The survey contained quantitative questions and a vignette-based qualitative substudy about risk assessment and patient selection for LT. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analyses were used.

Results:

We obtained answers from 129 physicians, and 63 participated in the qualitative substudy. We observed considerable variability in risk assessment prior to LT and identified many factors perceived to increase the risk of complications. Clinicians reported that the acceptable incidence of at least 1 severe post-operative complication for a LT program was 20% (95% CI: 20-30%). They identified the presence of any comorbidity as increasing the risk of different post-operative complications, especially acute kidney injury and cardiovascular complications. Frailty and functional disorders, severity of the liver disease, renal failure and cardiovascular comorbidities prior to LT emerged as important risk factors for post-operative morbidity. Most respondents were willing to pursue LT in patients with grade III acute-on-chronic liver failure but were less often willing to do so when faced with the uncertainty of a clinical example.

Conclusions:

Clinicians had a heterogeneous appraisal of the post-operative risk of complications following LT, as well as factors considered in risk assessment.

Assessing surgical risk calculators on hernia repair candidates with cirrhosis

PURPOSE

Several risk calculators have been developed and deployed to help surgeons estimate the mortality risk that comes with performing hernia repair surgery on patient with severe liver disease. This study seeks to evaluate the accuracy of these risk calculators on patients with cirrhosis and identify the most suitable population of patient to use these calculators on.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) 2013-2021 datasets were queried for patients who underwent hernia repair surgery. Mayo Clinic's "Post-operative Mortality Risk in Patients with Cirrhosis" risk calculator, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) calculator, NSQIP's Surgical Risk Calculator, and a surgical 5-item modified frailty index were assessed to determine whether they accurately predict mortality following abdominal hernia repair.

RESULTS

In total, 1368 patients met inclusion criteria. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the 4 mortality risk calculators resulted in the following: NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator = 0.803 (p < 0.001); "Post-operative Mortality Risk in Patients with Cirrhosis" with an etiology of "Alcoholic or Cholestatic" yielded an AUC = 0.722 (p < 0.001); MELD score yielded an AUC = 0.709 (p < 0.001); and the modified 5-item frailty index yielded an AUC = 0.583 (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator more accurately predicts 30-day mortality in patients with ascites undergoing hernia repair. However, if the patient is missing one of the 21 input variables required by this calculator, Mayo Clinic's 30-day mortality calculator should be consulted before the more widely used MELD score.

Clinical Analysis of Factors Affecting Hospital Mortality After Liver Transplant in Patients With High Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score

BACKGROUND

This study was undertaken to identify poor prognostic factors in patients with high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores.

METHODS

From September 2001 to December 2017, living donor liver transplant and deceased donor liver transplant were performed in 851 (84.4%) and 157 patients (15.6%), respectively, in our center. Eighty-one patients (8.0%) with MELD scores ≥ 35 were classified as patients with high MELD scores.

RESULTS

The overall survival rates in patients with high MELD scores were significantly worse than those in patients with low MELD scores (P = .005). However, no significant difference in survival was found between the 2 groups when in-hospital mortality was excluded. In-hospital mortality occurred in 18 patients (22.2%), and the main cause of death was sepsis (n = 14, 77.8%). On univariate analysis, the risk factors for in-hospital mortality were mean age (P = .028), mean MELD score (P = .045), intubation status (P < .001), culture positivity (P = .042), and encephalopathy grade 3 or 4 (P = .014). On multivariate analysis, age (P = .006), intubation status (P = .042), and culture positivity (P = .036) were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The main cause of in-hospital mortality was sepsis, and the risk factors for in-hospital mortality of patients with high MELD score were older age, preoperative intubation, and culture positivity. Special attention should be paid to the prevention and treatment of infection in the liver transplant of patient with high MELD scores.

Liver Transplantation

The field of liver transplantation has changed since the MELD scoring system became the most widely used donor allocation tool. Due to the MELD-based allocation system, sicker patients with higher MELD scores are being transplanted. Persistent organ donor shortages remain a challenging issue, and as a result, the wait-list mortality is a persistent problem for most of the regions. This chapter focuses on deceased donor and live donor liver transplantation in patients with complications of portal hypertension. Special attention will also be placed on donor-recipient matching, perioperative management of transplant patients, and the impact of hepatic hemodynamics on transplantation.

[Frontiers in liver transplantation in indication and techniques]

BACKGROUND

The frontiers in liver transplantation are intrinsically expansions of indications, e.g. hepatocellular carcinoma and (perihilar) cholangiocarcinoma, recipients with more severe concomitant diagnoses or "soft" contraindications and technically demanding reconstruction procedures of vascular structures (for portal vein thrombosis or aorto-hepatic conduits). In addition, an extension of the donor pool with suboptimal donor organs (old donors and steatotic livers) is of interest.

METHODS

This article presents the current situation based on personal experiences in daily practice and an appropriate literature review.

RESULTS

A significant reduction of 1‑year patient survival has been reported in Germany. The percentage of so-called marginal donor organs is inversely proportional to the very low donation rate and parallel to the waiting list mortality. Simultaneously, the proportion of inpatients with multiple organ failure is rising.

CONCLUSION

Results-oriented and controlled liver transplantation currently prohibits making inroads into the previously intrinsic frontiers. As long as the current circumstances do not change, a shift in the intrinsic frontiers of that which is surgically feasible will not be possible. The current situation forces the transplant surgeon to apply a more restrictive indications and organ acceptance policy. With this approach we can try to regain the previously excellent short- and long-term results of a 1‑year survival of 90% and a 20-year survival of 50%.