Use of percutaneous liver biopsies in marginal liver donors

Liver biopsy in assessment of extended criteria donors

The safety and liver utilization with prerecovery liver biopsy (PLB) in extended criteria liver donors are unclear. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in 1323 brain death donors (PLB = 496) from 3 organ procurement organizations (OPOs). Outcomes were complications, preempted liver recovery (PLR), and liver transplantation (LT). Additional analyses included liver-only and propensity score-matched multiorgan donor subgroups. PLB donors were older (57 versus 53 years; P < 0.001). Hepatitis C antibody positivity (14.3% versus 9.6%, P = 0.01) and liver-only donors (42.6% versus 17.5%; P < 0.001) were more prevalent. The PLB cohort had fewer complications (31.9% versus 42.3%; P < 0.001). In the PLB cohort, PLR was significantly higher (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.42-4.92) and LT lower (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.91). In liver-only and propensity score-matched multiorgan donor subgroups, PLR was significantly higher (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.06-2.94 and OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.37-3.82, respectively) without a decrease in LT (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.43-1.18 and OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.63-1.33, respectively) in PLB subgroups. In conclusion, in extended criteria liver donors, PLB is safe and decreases futile liver recovery without decreasing LT. Increased use of PLB, especially in liver-only donors, is likely to save costs to OPOs and transplant centers and improve efficiencies in organ allocation. Liver Transplantation 24 182-191 2018 AASLD.

Organ Procurement Organization Survey of Practices and Beliefs Regarding Prerecovery Percutaneous Liver Biopsy in Donation After Neurologic Determination of Death

BACKGROUND

Prerecovery liver biopsy (PLB) allows histological evaluation of the organ before procurement. The opinions and what factors might influence PLB use within Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) are unknown.

METHODS

A survey instrument was distributed by the Association of OPOs to the clinical directors of all 58 OPOs. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Results were also stratified based on OPO characteristics.

RESULTS

Forty-nine (84.5%) of 58 OPOs responded to the survey; 40 (81.6%) of 49 currently perform PLB. This did not vary based on land mass, population, livers discarded, transplanted, donor age, or recipient MELD scores. Donor age, obesity, alcohol abuse, hepatitis serology, liver only donor, imaging results, and transplant center request were the most common indications for PLB in over 80% of OPOs. The median rate of performance is 5% to 10% of donors. Most use interventional radiologists to perform and the donor hospital pathologist/s to interpret PLB. Most OPOs believe PLBs are safe, reliable, useful, and performed often enough. Most say they did not believe they are easy to obtain. Beliefs were mixed regarding accuracy. The topics likely to influence PLB use were utility and accuracy of PLB, and availability of staff to perform PLB. OPOs that perform PLB more often were more likely to have favorable opinions of safety and pathologist availability, and more influenced by safety, reliability, availability, and a national consensus on the use of PLB.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable variability exists in the use of PLB. Additional information on the utility, accuracy, and safety of PLB are needed to optimize its use.

A Simple Technique for Aortic Cannulation in Organ Donors with Advanced Aortic Disease

Cannulation of the abdominal aorta in organ donors with advanced arteriosclerotic disease or extensive trauma may be problematic owing to difficulty in securing a watertight tie around the diseased aorta, the danger of creating a false passageway in the aorta, and the risk of breaking off plaque particles that can advance into the arteries of donated organs. Cannulation problems can be avoided in these challenging donors by using a simplified technique for cannulation of the thoracic aorta in which a Foley catheter is passed down around the aortic arch, the balloon is inflated, and cool flushing is initiated.

Prerecovery liver biopsy in the brain-dead donor: a case-control study of logistics, safety, precision, and utility

Prerecovery liver biopsy (PLB) can potentially to decrease futile recovery and increase utilization of marginal brain-dead donor (BDD) livers. A case-control study was conducted to examine the logistics, safety, histological precision, and liver utilization associated with PLB in BDDs. Twenty-three cases between January 2008 and January 2013 were compared to 2 groups: 48 sequential and 69 clinically matched controls. Compared to the sequential controls, the cases were older (53 versus 46 years), heavier (30.2 versus 25.8 kg/m2), had higher prevalences of hypertension (78.3% versus 44.7%) and alcohol use (56.5% versus 23.4%), and a lower United Network for Organ Sharing expected organ yield (0.73 versus 0.81 livers/donor; P < 0.05 for all). Baseline characteristics were similar between cases and clinical controls. Donor management time was longer for the cases (22.4 hours) versus sequential controls (16.5 hours, P = 0.01) and clinical controls (15.9 hours, P = 0.01). Complications for cases (8.7%) were not different from either group of controls (18.8% for sequential controls, P = 0.46; 17.4% for clinical controls, P = 0.50). The agreement between the donor hospital and study pathologists was substantial regarding evaluation of steatosis (κ = 0.623) and fibrosis (κ = 0.627) and moderate regarding inflammation (κ = 0.495). The proportions of livers that were transplanted were similar for the cases and the clinical controls (60.9% versus 59.4%). In contrast, the proportion of donors for whom liver recovery was not attempted was higher (30.4% versus 8.7%), and the proportion of attempted liver recoveries that did not result in transplantation was lower (8.7% versus 31.9%). These differences were significant at P = 0.009. Overall, PLB is logistically feasible with only a minimal delay and is safe, its interpretation at donor hospitals is reproducible, and it appears to decrease futile liver recovery.

The impact of donor cocaine use on the outcome of adult liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

To investigate the feasibility of adult liver transplantation from donors with cocaine use.

METHODS

Of 807 adult liver transplantations performed between 1994 and 2000, 72 donors (8.9%) were current cocaine users. Donor characteristics and post-transplantation outcomes were retrospectively compared between the 72 cocaine and 126 control group selected from the remaining 735 donors, matched for age and having no history of drug use.

RESULTS

Marijuana, opiates and amphetamines were drugs of abuse often present with cocaine. Except for a high incidence of acute alcohol use in the cocaine donors, donor characteristics were comparable. The cocaine group had a significantly higher graft loss within three months of transplant (18.1% vs. 7.9%, p < 0.05), and had a trend toward lower graft survival (76% vs. 86% at one yr).

CONCLUSIONS

Potential adverse effect of cocaine and substances concurrently involved on donor liver was suggested. To clarify the distinct acceptance criteria of cocaine users for liver donation, prospective study is warranted.

The impact of donor chemical overdose on the outcome of liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

To overcome the critical shortage of liver grafts, many centers have been widening the acceptance criteria for liver donation. Use of liver grafts from victims who have suffered chemical overdose (COD) may be one option that could help to expand the donor pool. However, this practice has been poorly documented.

METHODS

Of 1,195 orthotopic liver transplantations performed at our institution between June 1994 and March 2001, 22 involved livers (1.8%) were retrieved from COD donors. Donor and recipient characteristics and posttransplantation outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The main chemicals causing brain death of the donor were carbon monoxide (n=4), cocaine (n=4), tricyclic antidepressants (n=3), 3,4-methylenedioxy- methamphetamine (n=2), opiates (n=2), aspirin (n=1), gamma hydroxybutyrate (n=1), heroin (n=1), insulin (n=1), verapamil (n=1), barbiturate (n=1), and brompheniramine/phenylpropanolamine (n=1). Primary nonfunction developed in one patient who had received a liver from an 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine-intoxicated donor. Another patient died of fungal meningitis 10 days after transplantation with a functioning graft. The remaining 20 patients experienced acceptable early graft function, as demonstrated by initial mean peak values of bilirubin (4.8 mg/dL), aspartate aminotransferase (624 U/L), and alanine aminotransferase (730 U/L). One-year graft survival rate estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method was 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfactory outcomes of graft function were achieved in orthotopic liver transplantations from COD donors. The cautious use of liver grafts from selected COD donors may be a worthwhile method of increasing the availability of scarce donor organs.

A simple technique for aortic cannulation in organ donors with advanced aortic disease

Cannulation of the abdominal aorta in organ donors with advanced arteriosclerotic disease or extensive trauma may be problematic owing to difficulty in securing a watertight tie around the diseased aorta, the danger of creating a false passageway in the aorta, and the risk of breaking off plaque particles that can advance into the arteries of donated organs. Cannulation problems can be avoided in these challenging donors by using a simplified technique for cannulation of the thoracic aorta in which a Foley catheter is passed down around the aortic arch, the balloon is inflated, and cool flushing is initiated.