Transplantation of hepatitis C-positive livers in hepatitis C-positive patients is equivalent to transplanting hepatitis C-negative livers

Current Understanding of Marginal Grafts in Liver Transplantation

End-stage liver disease (ESLD), stemming from a spectrum of chronic liver pathologies including chronic liver failure, acute cirrhosis decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma, imposes a significant global healthcare burden. Liver transplantation (LT) remains the only treatment for ESLD. However, the escalating mortality on transplant waitlists has prompted the utilization of marginal liver grafts in LT procedures. These grafts primarily encompass elderly livers, steatotic livers, livers from donation after circulatory death, split livers and those infected with the hepatitis virus. While the expansion of the donor pool offers promise, it also introduces concomitant risks. These encompass graft failure, biliary and cardiovascular complications, the recurrence of liver disease and reduced patient and graft survival. Consequently, various established strategies, ranging from improved donor-recipient matching to surgical interventions, have emerged to mitigate these risks. This article undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the current landscape, evaluating the viability of diverse marginal liver grafts. Additionally, it synthesizes approaches aimed at enhancing the quality of such marginal liver grafts. The overarching objective is to augment the donor pool and ameliorate the risk factors associated with the shortage of liver grafts.

Donor Viral Hepatitis and Liver Transplantation

Despite increasing numbers of organ transplants completed each year, there continues to be an organ shortage in liver transplantation. This has led to the utilization of previously discarded or "marginal" allografts, such as those from donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) or hepatitis B virus (HBV). The advent of direct acting antivirals and nucleos(t)ide analogs has allowed these allografts to be safely transplanted regardless of the recipients' hepatitis status with comparable graft and patient survival. Recent advances have even allowed usage of actively viremic donors with similar graft and patient outcomes. This article presents an overview of the use of HCV positive and HBV positive allografts.

Prevention of viral infections in solid organ transplant recipients in the era of COVID-19: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, viral infections are associated with direct morbidity and mortality and may influence long-term allograft outcomes. Prevention of viral infections by vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis, and behavioral measures is therefore of paramount importance.

AREAS COVERED

We searched Pubmed to select publications to review current preventive strategies against the most important viral infections in SOT recipients, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, CMV, and other herpesvirus, viral hepatitis, measles, mumps, rubella, and BK virus.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical significance of the reduced humoral response following mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in SOT recipients still needs to be better clarified, in particular with regard to the vaccines' efficacy in preventing severe disease. Although a third dose improves immunogenicity and is already integrated into routine practice in several countries, further research is still needed to explore additional interventions. In the upcoming years, further data are expected to better delineate the role of virus-specific cell mediated immune monitoring for the prevention of CMV and potentially other viral diseases, and the role of the letermovir in the prevention of CMV in SOT recipients. Future studies including clinical endpoints will hopefully facilitate the integration of successful new influenza vaccination strategies into clinical practice.

The Impact of Treatment Delay on Hepatitis C Liver Transplant Outcomes

Background: Direct-acting antivirals for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) have improved outcomes in liver transplant recipients (LTRs). However, the timing of HCV treatment and approach to treating rejection have not been well described. Additionally, pharmacists' roles in these comprehensive areas have not been investigated. Methods: This single-center, retrospective, cohort review compared 1-year graft and patient survival between HCV-positive and HCV-negative LTRs. Secondary endpoints included 1-year rejection rates, HCV sustained virologic response and time to HCV treatment. Results: Ninety-two HCV Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAT)-positive LTRs were matched 1:1 to HCV-seronegative LTRs. One-year graft and patient survival were similar between groups. HCV-positive LTRs were more likely to experience biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), and despite treatment with pulse steroids, there was no impact on graft survival or occurrence of fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH). Time to HCV treatment was 5.4-6.4 months post-transplant, with no treatment failures or impact on graft or patient survival. Conclusions: No difference was seen in graft survival at 1 year between HCV-positive and HCV-seronegative LTRs. Delayed time to treatment of HCV and treatment of rejections in the HCV-positive cohort did not impact outcomes. However, pharmacist-driven protocols could ensure more efficient initiation of HCV treatment in the future.

Organ Donation from Donors with Hepatitis B or C in South Korea: A 2013-2017 Nationwide Data Analysis

Background

The number of organ donations from hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donors is gradually increasing; however, the current status of organ donation from brain-dead donors with hepatitis in South Korea has not been analyzed. This study aimed to analyze this.

Material/Methods

In total, 9210 potential brain deaths were reported in South Korea from January 2013 to December 2017, of which 333 were hepatitis carriers (HBV, n=246; HCV, n=87). Based on the data from the Korean Network for Organ Sharing and Korea Organ Donation Agency, 2460 completion of transplantations from brain-dead donors have been performed, of which 71 were hepatitis carriers (HBV, n=60; HCV, n=11).

Results

There were 60 and 11 transplantations from HBV- and HCV-positive brain-dead donors, respectively. The main reasons for organ transplantation failure were recipient’s refusal (n=90), unsuitability as donors (n=80), non-brain death (n=45), and cardiac death (n=20). There were 71 and 31 kidney and liver donations, respectively; the average number of organs donated by HBV-positive donors was higher than that donated by HCV-positive donors. HBV-positive donors donated more hearts and livers than HCV-positive donors.

Conclusions

There are few organ donations from brain-dead donors with hepatitis B or C which led to transplantation completion in South Korea, and the main reasons for failure are recipient’s refusal to receive organs from donors with hepatitis and unsuitability for donation due to active viral conditions. To promote organ transplantations from donors with hepatitis B and C virus, we could consider 3 strategies: 1) reducing recipient’s refusal rates by educating recipients and their families on the outcomes of organ donation from hepatitis carriers, 2) establishing treatment protocols for infection management after organ transplantations from HBV/HCV brain-dead donors, and 3) increasing the relevant experience of medical staff.

The current status of virus-positive liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The last 2 years have seen significant developments in virus-positive liver transplantation. This review provides an updated account of the transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HIV-positive livers, with a specific focus on studies published in the last 18 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

The advent of highly efficacious direct acting antiviral agents, nucleos(t)ide analogues and a continued organ shortage have led to the well tolerated utilization of HCV, HBV and HIV-positive organs. There has been a significant increase in the transplantation of HCV seropositive and NAT+ organs into HCV-negative recipients, without compromising patient or graft survival. Early reports of HBV core antibody (HBVcAb), HBV surface antigen (HBVsAg) positive and NAT+ donors are growing in the USA with promising results. Similarly, small studies have described the use of HIV-positive to HIV-positive liver transplantation without concerns for superinfection.

SUMMARY

HCV, HBV and HIV-positive liver transplantations can be accomplished safely and are associated with equivalent outcomes when paired with appropriate recipients. The practice of virus positive liver transplantation should be encouraged to combat the ongoing organ shortage.

Paradigm Shift in Utilization of Livers from Hepatitis C-Viremic Donors into Hepatitis C Virus-Negative Patients

Despite record-breaking numbers of liver transplants (LTs) performed in the United States in each of the last 7 years, many patients remain on the wait list as the demand for LT continues to exceed the supply of available donors. The emergence of highly effective and well-tolerated direct-acting antiviral therapy has transformed the clinical course and management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in both the pretransplant and posttransplant setting. Historically, donor livers infected with HCV were either transplanted into patients already infected with HCV or discarded.

Immediate administration of antiviral therapy after transplantation of hepatitis C-infected livers into uninfected recipients: Implications for therapeutic planning

The practice of transplanting hepatitis C (HCV)-infected livers into HCV-uninfected recipients has not previously been recommended in transplant guidelines, in part because of concerns over uncontrolled HCV infection of the allograft. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) provide an opportunity to treat donor-derived HCV-infection and should be administered early in the posttransplant period. However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of an immediate DAA treatment approach, including how to manage logistical barriers surrounding timely DAA procurement, are required prior to broader use of HCV-positive donor organs. We report the results of a trial in which 14 HCV-negative patients underwent successful liver transplantation from HCV-positive donors. Nine patients received viremic (nucleic acid testing [NAT]-positive) livers and started a 12-week course of oral glecaprevir-pibrentasvir within 5 days of transplant. Five patients received livers from HCV antibody-positive nonviremic donors and were followed using a reactive approach. Survival in NAT-positive recipients is 100% at a median follow-up of 46 weeks. An immediate treatment approach for HCV NAT-positive liver transplantation into uninfected recipients is safe and efficacious. Securing payer approval for DAAs early in the posttransplant course could enable need-based allocation of HCV-positive donor organs irrespective of candidate HCV status, while averting chronic HCV allograft infection.

Hepatitis C: looking into the future

INTRODUCTION

The recent availability of highly effective hepatitis C medications, with a cure rate approaching 100%, has created a wide range of questions and uncertainties.

AREAS COVERED

The most recent data around hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination will be reviewed. In addition, the impact of HCV cure or sustained virologic response (SVR) on the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development will be discussed. Although the terms 'SVR' and 'cure' are used interchangeably, there are little data to support that they are actually the same. In this review, we will shed some light on the status of HCV vaccine development, obstacles, and published experience. Finally, in the face of decreasing HCV patients needing transplantation, and increasing available organs from donors infected with HCV, the question is that, is it possible to transplant an organ infected with HCV to a patient who is not infected? The pros and cons of transplanting HCV-positive organs to HCV-negative recipients will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Although the new advances in HCV treatment have solved many problems, it created several new issues which the medical community has to deal with and which will likely remain in the near future.

Expanding the donor pool: Hepatitis C, hepatitis B and human immunodeficiency virus-positive donors in liver transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) remains the best option for patients with end-stage liver disease but the demand for organs from deceased donors continues to outweigh the available supply. The advent of highly effective anti-viral treatments has reduced the number of patients undergoing LT for hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis B (HBV) related liver disease and yet the number of patients waiting for LT continues to increase, driven by an increase in the patients listed with a diagnosis of cirrhosis due to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and alcohol-related liver disease. In addition, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, which was previously a contra-indication for LT, is no longer a fatal disease due to the effectiveness of HIV therapy and patients with HIV and liver disease are now developing indications for LT. The rising demand for LT is projected to increase further in the future, thus driving the need to investigate potential means of expanding the pool of potential donors. One mechanism for doing so is utilizing organs from donors that previously would have been discarded or used only in exceptional circumstances such as HCV-positive, HBV-positive, and HIV-positive donors. The advent of highly effective anti-viral therapy has meant that these organs can now be used with excellent outcomes in HCV, HBV or HIV infected recipients and in some cases uninfected recipients.

Recent advances in liver transplantation for cancer: The future of transplant oncology

Liver transplantation is widely indicated as a curative treatment for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. However, with recent therapeutic advances, as well as efforts to increase the donor pool, liver transplantation has been carefully expanded to patients with other primary or secondary malignancies in the liver. Cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases, and hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma are amongst the most relevant new indications. In this review we discuss the fundamental concepts of this ambitious undertaking, as well as the newest indications for liver transplantation, with a special focus on future perspectives within the recently established concept of transplant oncology.

Transplantation of HCV Viremic Livers into HCV Viremic Recipients Followed by Direct-acting Antiviral Therapy

Background and Aims: Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected organs are underutilized. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) therapy in HCV viremic patients who are transplanted with a liver from a HCV viremic donor. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study, including patients seen from July 2015 to April 2017. HCV viremic patients transplanted with a liver from a HCV viremic donor and subsequently treated with DAAs were included. Outcomes assessed included undetectable viral load at 12 weeks after completing DAA therapy (sustained virologic response, SVR₁₂), adverse events, and interactions with immunosuppression. Results: Twenty-four HCV viremic recipients received livers from HCV viremic donors. Median age was 63 years, and the majority (79.2%) were genotype 1a. Donors and recipients were viremic at the time of transplant. Median modified model for end-stage liver disease score was 19, and median time on the waitlist was 81 days. Median time from transplant to initiation of DAA therapy was 123 days. Several DAA regimens were used and 15 (62.5%) patients did not receive ribavirin. Treatment duration ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Twenty-three (95.8%) patients achieved SVR₁₂. Five (20.8%) patients developed adverse events; however, none required DAA discontinuation. Conclusions: DAA therapy was efficacious and well tolerated in HCV viremic recipients who underwent liver transplantation from a HCV viremic donor.

Use of Hepatitis C-Positive Liver Grafts in Hepatitis C-Negative Recipients

As the demand for liver transplantation continues to rise, the scarcity of liver donor grafts has led to the use of extended criteria grafts for liver transplantation in select group of patients. Hepatitis C-seropositive liver grafts have been used primarily in hepatitis C-positive recipients, with studies showing non-inferior outcomes when compared to hepatitis C-negative grafts. Studies suggest that hepatitis C serology status of the donor liver does not influence the patient or graft outcomes in the recipient. These results advocate for offering hepatitis C-positive grafts to all patients awaiting liver transplantation regardless of their hepatitis C status. However, some concerns persist regarding the ethics of potentially introducing a new infection into a patient that could progress to chronic liver disease following liver transplantation. The recent approval of direct-acting antiviral therapy offers a solution to this dilemma, as it has changed the landscape of hepatitis C management by making it a curable disease. In this review, we shall discuss the current evidence regarding the use of hepatitis C-seropositive donor grafts in hepatitis C-positive and hepatitis C-negative patients.

Donor-derived Viral Infections in Liver Transplantation

Donor-derived infections are defined as any infection present in the donor that is transmitted to 1 or more recipients. Donor-derived infections can be categorized into 2 groups: "expected" and "unexpected" infections. Expected transmissions occur when the donor is known to have an infection, such as positive serology for cytomegalovirus, Epstein Barr virus, or hepatitis B core antibody, at the time of donation. Unexpected transmissions occur when a donor has no known infection before donation, but 1 or more transplant recipients develop an infection derived from the common donor. Unexpected infections are estimated to occur in far less than 1% of solid organ transplant recipients. We will review the epidemiology, risk factors, and approaches to prevention and management of donor-derived viral infectious disease transmission in liver transplantation.

Use of hepatitis C-positive grafts in hepatitis C-negative liver transplant recipients is cost effective

BACKGROUND

The number of patients needing liver transplantation (LT) exceeds the number of available allografts. The current opioid epidemic in this country has increased the number of potential donors infected with hepatitis C (HCV).

METHODS

We assessed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) by comparing the costs and number of liver transplants performed using HCV-positive and HCV-negative grafts into patients without HCV infection in a decision analysis model with a 1-year time horizon.

RESULTS

The use of HCV-positive grafts was found to have an ICER below $50 000 across all MELD scores. Using our baseline cohort with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of 15-22, the ICER was $21 233/additional LT performed. As the MELD scores increased, the ICER decreased. Above a MELD score of 23, the use of HCV-positive grafts became cost saving (-$115 419). Our model was robust to all variables tested in the sensitivity analyses, except drug costs.

CONCLUSION

The results of our decision analysis model highlight the potential pharmacoeconomic benefit of utilizing HCV-positive grafts in LT candidates who are not infected with HCV. The use of HCV-positive grafts is at least cost effective and even cost saving in patients with MELD scores above 23.

Hepatitis C: Current Controversies and Future Potential in Solid Organ Transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the changing landscape of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the context of organ transplantation. This focuses on areas of controversy and future potential in the era of highly effective direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the advent of safe and highly effective DAA therapy, HCV infection is now curable in virtually all cases, including organ transplant recipients. Excellent drug tolerability and safety combined with high cure rates across all organ groups means that HCV is no longer a barrier to transplantation or its outcomes. Mounting data demonstrate the safety of using organs from HCV-infected donors with subsequent treatment of HCV in the recipient and a potential to expand the donor pool. Historical data demonstrating inferior survival in transplant recipients with HCV is of limited relevance in the DAA era. Virtually all transplant recipients with HCV infection can be cured, while early data also suggest excellent outcomes in recipients of organs from HCV viremic donors. The optimal timing of HCV therapy in relation to transplantation and the optimal use of organs from HCV viremic donors remain areas of controversy and ongoing research efforts.

The American Society of Transplantation Consensus Conference on the Use of Hepatitis C Viremic Donors in Solid Organ Transplantation

The availability of direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has resulted in a profound shift in the approach to the management of this infection. These changes have affected the practice of solid organ transplantation by altering the framework by which patients with end-stage organ disease are managed and receive organ transplants. The high level of safety and efficacy of these medications in patients with chronic HCV infection provides the opportunity to explore their use in the setting of transplanting organs from HCV-viremic patients into non-HCV-viremic recipients. Because these organs are frequently discarded and typically come from younger donors, this approach has the potential to save lives on the solid organ transplant waitlist. Therefore, an urgent need exists for prospective research protocols that study the risk versus benefit of using organs for hepatitis C-infected donors. In response to this rapidly changing practice and the need for scientific study and consensus, the American Society of Transplantation convened a meeting of experts to review current data and develop the framework for the study of using HCV viremic organs in solid organ transplantation.

Cost-Effectiveness of Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment in Hepatitis C-Infected Liver Transplant Candidates With Compensated Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)(+) donors represent an effective strategy to increase liver donor availability to HCV-infected recipients. However, many HCV(+) transplant candidates are now receiving treatment with direct-acting anti-viral (DAA) agents that lower the risk of posttransplant HCV recurrence but could make the patient ineligible for HCV(+) livers.

METHODS

We compared pretransplant DAA treatment versus deferred DAA treatment using a cost-effectiveness decision analysis model to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (cost per quality-adjusted life year gained) from the societal perspective across a range of HCV(+) liver availability rates. For practical considerations, the population modeled was restricted to well-compensated HCV(+) cirrhotics listed for liver transplantation with hepatocellular carcinoma MELD exception points.

RESULTS

Under base case conditions, the deferred DAA treatment strategy was found to be the "dominant" strategy. That is, it provided superior health outcomes at cost savings compared to the pretransplant DAA treatment strategy. The pretransplant DAA treatment strategy trended towards cost-effectiveness as HCV(+) donor liver availability declined. However, only in 1 scenario that was highly optimized for favorable outcomes in the pretransplant DAA treatment arm (low availability of HCV(+) organs, low cost of DAA treatment, high cost of HCV recurrence) was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with HCV DAA treatment before transplant less than US $150 000/quality-adjusted life-year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferring HCV treatment until after liver transplant and maintaining access to the expanded pool of HCV(+) donors appears to be the most cost-effective strategy for well-compensated HCV-infected cirrhotics listed for liver transplantation with hepatocellular carcinoma, even in geographic areas of relatively low HCV(+) donor availability.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: outcomes and novel surgical approaches

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the best treatment option for patients with early-stage tumours and accounts for ∼20-40% of all liver transplantations performed at most centres worldwide. The Milan criteria are the most common criteria to select patients with HCC for transplantation but they can be seen as too restrictive. Several proposals have been made for a moderate expansion of the criteria, which result in good outcomes but with an increase in the risk of tumour recurrence. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the outcomes after liver transplantation for HCC, focusing on tumour recurrence in terms of surveillance, prevention and treatment. Additionally, novel surgical techniques have been developed to increase the available pool of organs for liver transplantation (such as living donor liver transplantation, donation after circulatory death and split livers), but the effect of these techniques on patients with HCC is still under debate. Thus, we will describe these techniques and expose the benefits and disadvantages of each surgical approach. Finally, we will comment on the limitations of the current priority policies for liver transplantation and the need to further refine them to better serve the population.

Long term follow-up and outcome of liver transplantation from hepatitis B surface antigen positive donors

Liver transplant for hepatitis B virus (HBV) currently yields excellent outcomes: it allows to rescue patients with an HBV-related advanced liver disease, resulting in a demographical modification of the waiting list for liver transplant. In an age of patient-tailored treatments, in liver transplantation as well the aim is to offer the best suitable graft to the patient who can benefit from it, also expanding the criteria for organ acceptance and allocation. With the intent of developing strategies to increase the donor pool, we set-up a multicenter study involving 3 Liver Transplant Centers in Italy: patients undergoing liver transplantation between March 03, 2004, and May 21, 2010, were retrospectively evaluated. 1408 patients underwent liver transplantation during the study period, 28 (2%) received the graft from hepatitis B surface antigen positive (HBsAg)-positive deceased donors. The average follow-up after liver transplantation was 63.7 mo [range: 0.1-119.4; SD ± 35.8]. None Primary non-function, re-liver transplantation, early or late hepatic artery thrombosis occurred. The 1-, 3- and 5-year graft and patient survival resulted of 85.7%, 82.1%, 78.4%. Our results suggest that the use of HBsAg-positive donors liver grafts is feasible, since HBV can be controlled without affecting graft stability. However, the selection of grafts and the postoperative antiviral therapy should be managed appropriately.

Use of Hepatitis C-Positive Donor Livers in Liver Transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this article is to review recent literature regarding the use of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive donor livers in liver transplantation. Given the prevalence of HCV-positive patients on the waitlist coupled with high waitlist mortality, use of HCV-positive livers may be a means to meet patient needs. This review seeks to primarily answer the following questions: can HCV-positive livers be used safely and effectively? Are new direct acting antiviral medications safe and effective in HCV-positive liver recipients?

RECENT FINDINGS

Use of HCV-positive donor livers for liver transplantation in HCV-positive recipients is increasing. These donor livers have equivalent patient and graft survival when compared to HCV-negative donor livers in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients. Recent studies suggest that use of direct acting antiviral medications in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients can be successful, although there is insufficient data for their use in recipients of HCV-positive donor livers.

SUMMARY

HCV-positive donor livers may be safely and effectively used in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients. Direct acting antiviral medications appear safe and effective in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients, but data on their efficacy in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients are limited. Future research should focus on the use of HCV-positive donor livers in HCV-negative liver transplant recipients.

Long-term outcomes of liver transplantation in patients with hepatitis C infection are not affected by HCV positivity of a donor

Background

The use of HCV-positive livers for HCV-positive recipients is becoming more common. Our aim is to evaluate long-term outcomes in liver transplant recipients transplanted with HCV antibody-positive organs.

Methods

From the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (1995–2013), we selected all adult liver transplant recipients with HCV, and cross-sectionally compared long-term graft loss and mortality rates between those who were transplanted from HCV antibody-positive (HCV+) vs. HCV antibody-negative donors.

Results

We included 33,668 HCV+ liver transplant recipients (54.0 ± 7.7 years old, 74.1% male, 71.0% white, 23.6% with liver malignancy). Of those, 5.7% (N = 1930) were transplanted from HCV+ donors; the proportion gradually increased from 2.9% in 1995 to 9.4% in 2013. Patients who were transplanted from HCV+ positive donors were more likely to be discharged alive after transplantation (95.4% vs. 93.9%, p = 0.006), but this difference was completely accounted for by a greater proportion of HCV+ donors in more recent study years (p = 0.10 after adjustment for the transplant year). After transplantation, both mortality in HCV patients transplanted from HCV+ donors (12.5% in 1 year, 24.2% in 3 years, 33.0% in 5 years) and the graft loss rate (2.2% in 1 year, 4.8% in 3 years, 7.5% in 5 years) were similar to those in HCV patients transplanted from HCV-negative donors (all p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Over the past two decades, the use of HCV+ organs for liver transplantation has tripled. Despite this, the long-term outcomes of HCV+ liver transplant recipients transplanted from HCV+ donors were not different from those who were transplanted with HCV-negative organs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12876-016-0551-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pros and Cons: Usage of organs from donors infected with hepatitis C virus - Revision in the direct-acting antiviral era

Should organs from hepatitis C antibody positive donors (HCVD+) be used for transplantation? Organ shortage forces transplant teams to use donors with extended criteria. The decision to transplant a HCVD+ graft is a balance between the risk of transmission of a virus that could lead to end-stage liver diseases and the benefit of access to transplantation, specifically in patients with life-threatening disease. The other issue is the impact of HCV-related liver fibrosis in the donor graft on the long-term outcome in the recipient. Thus, the use of HCVD+ demonstrated a shorter meantime on the waiting list in kidney transplantation. When a HCVD+ graft is transplanted, the risk of HCV transmission depends on; 1) the quality of screening of the donor; 2) the presence of viral replication in the donor at the time of transplantation and the ability to detect it; and 3) the HCV status of the recipient but also the type of transplanted organ. In liver transplantation, the use of HCVD+ graft is usually restricted to recipients with a chronic HCV infection. Several reports showed some competition between HCV donor and recipient strain without deleterious impact on graft and patient survival. Controversies are still pending regarding the quality of the graft and the progression of fibrosis. The recent approval of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) dramatically changes the landscape of HCV infection treatment. After transplantation, combinations of DAA show high efficacy and good safety profile. In the near future, extensive use of DAA should reduce the number of HCVD+ with a positive HCV RNA, limiting the risk of transmission but also the number of patients on waiting lists for a disease related to HCV.

Reappraisal of the hepatitis C virus-positive donor in solid organ transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donor allografts may be considered for HCV-positive recipients, but are underutilized. With new effective antiviral treatments, we aim to review data on the use of HCV-positive allografts in solid organ transplantation and place them in the context of the changing HCV landscape.

RECENT FINDINGS

Hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplant in the USA and Europe and a significant comorbidity in patients on the waitlist for nonliver solid organ transplantation. Patients with HCV on the waitlist for nonliver solid organ transplantation have worse outcomes compared with those without HCV. However, survival after transplantation is improved compared with those who remain on the waitlist. There has been concern that use of HCV-positive allografts would lead to worse post-transplant outcomes. However, more recent data suggest that transplant outcomes for recipients who accept HCV-positive donor allografts may be comparable with those who receive HCV-negative allografts. Emerging treatments to eradicate HCV have further improved the course of HCV-positive individuals, with improved efficacy and reduced side-effects.

SUMMARY

In view of the changing landscape of hepatitis C treatment and reduced wait time on the transplant waiting lists for those accepting HCV-positive donors, future use of select HCV-positive donors in solid organ transplantation should be encouraged.

Management of the Potential Organ Donor in the ICU: Society of Critical Care Medicine/American College of Chest Physicians/Association of Organ Procurement Organizations Consensus Statement

This document was developed through the collaborative efforts of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American College of Chest Physicians, and the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. Under the auspices of these societies, a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force was convened, incorporating expertise in critical care medicine, organ donor management, and transplantation. Members of the task force were divided into 13 subcommittees, each focused on one of the following general or organ-specific areas: death determination using neurologic criteria, donation after circulatory death determination, authorization process, general contraindications to donation, hemodynamic management, endocrine dysfunction and hormone replacement therapy, pediatric donor management, cardiac donation, lung donation, liver donation, kidney donation, small bowel donation, and pancreas donation. Subcommittees were charged with generating a series of management-related questions related to their topic. For each question, subcommittees provided a summary of relevant literature and specific recommendations. The specific recommendations were approved by all members of the task force and then assembled into a complete document. Because the available literature was overwhelmingly comprised of observational studies and case series, representing low-quality evidence, a decision was made that the document would assume the form of a consensus statement rather than a formally graded guideline. The goal of this document is to provide critical care practitioners with essential information and practical recommendations related to management of the potential organ donor, based on the available literature and expert consensus.

Management of Hepatitis C Post-liver Transplantation: a Comprehensive Review

Infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common cause of chronic liver disease, and HCV-related cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma are the leading causes for liver transplantation in the Western world. Recurrent infection of the transplanted liver allograft is universal in patients with detectable HCV viremia at the time of transplant and can cause a spectrum of disease, ranging from asymptomatic chronic infection to an aggressive fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Recurrent HCV is more aggressive in the post-transplant population and is a leading cause of allograft loss, morbidity, and mortality. Historically, treatment of recurrent HCV has been limited by low rates of treatment success and high side effect profiles. Over the past few years, promising new therapies have emerged for the treatment of HCV that have high rates of sustained virological response without the need for interferon based regimens. In addition to being highly effective, these treatments have higher rates of adherence and a lower side effect profile. The purpose of this review is to summarize current therapies in recurrent HCV infection, to review the recent advances in therapy, and to highlight areas of ongoing research.

Recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplant

End stage liver disease from hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplantation in many parts of the world accounting for up to 40% of liver transplants. Antiviral therapy either before or after liver transplantation is challenging due to side effects and lower efficacy in patients with cirrhosis and liver transplant recipients, as well as from drug interactions with immunosuppressants. Factors that may affect recurrent hepatitis C include donor age, immunosuppression, IL28B genotype, cytomegalovirus infection, and metabolic syndrome. Older donor age has persistently been shown to have the greatest impact on recurrent hepatitis C. After liver transplantation, distinguishing recurrent hepatitis C from acute cellular rejection may be difficult, although the development of molecular markers may help in making the correct diagnosis. The advent of interferon free regimens with direct acting antiviral agents that include NS3/4A protease inhibitors, NS5B polymerase inhibitors and NS5A inhibitors holds great promise in improving outcomes for liver transplant candidates and recipients.

Changing pattern of donor selection criteria in deceased donor liver transplant: a review of literature

During the last couple of decades, with standardization and progress in surgical techniques, immunosuppression and post liver transplantation patient care, the outcome of liver transplantation has been optimized. However, the principal limitation of transplantation remains access to an allograft. The number of patients who could derive benefit from liver transplantation markedly exceeds the number of available deceased donors. The large gap between the growing list of patients waiting for liver transplantation and the scarcity of donor organs has fueled efforts to maximize existing donor pool and identify new avenues. This article reviews the changing pattern of donor for liver transplantation using grafts from extended criteria donors (elderly donors, steatotic donors, donors with malignancies, donors with viral hepatitis), donation after cardiac death, use of partial grafts (split liver grafts) and other suboptimal donors (hypernatremia, infections, hypotension and inotropic support).

Strategies to reduce hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major health problem that leads to chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, being the most frequent indication for liver transplantation in several countries. Unfortunately, HCV re-infects the liver graft almost invariably following reperfusion, with an accelerated history of recurrence, leading to 10%-30% of patients progressing to cirrhosis within 5 years of transplantation. In this sense, some groups have even advocated for not re-transplanting this patients, as lower patient and graft outcomes have been reported. However, the management of HCV recurrence is being optimized and several strategies to reduce post-transplant recurrence could improve outcomes, decrease the rate of re-transplantation and optimize the use of available grafts. Three moments may be the focus of potential actions in order to decrease the impact of viral recurrence: the pre-transplant moment, the transplant environment and the post-transplant management. In the pre-transplant setting, it is not well established if reducing the pre transplant viral load affects the risk for HCV progression after transplant. Obviously, antiviral treatment can render the patient HCV RNA negative post transplant but the long-term benefit has not yet been fully established to justify the cost and clinical risk. In the transplant moment, factors as donor age, cold ischemia time, graft steatosis and ischemia/reperfusion injury may lead to a higher and more aggressive viral recurrence. After the transplant, discussion about immunosuppression and the moment to start the treatment (prophylactic, pre-emptive or once-confirmed) together with new antiviral drugs are of interest. This review aims to help clinicians have a global overview of post-transplant HCV recurrence and strategies to reduce its impact on our patients.

Extended donors in liver transplantation

Several criteria are used to differentiate between standard and extended allograft donors. These criteria include deceased after cardiac death, advanced donor age, steatosis, previous malignancy in the donor, hepatitis C virus-positive allografts, human T-cell lymphotropic virus-positive allografts, active infections in the donor, high-risk donors, split liver transplantations, and living donor liver transplantations. Review of the literature can lead each practitioner to incorporate extended criteria donors into their transplant program, thereby individualizing the use of these allografts, increasing the donor pool, and decreasing overall waitlist mortality.

Liver transplantation in the 21st century: expanding the donor options

Over the past decade, use of ECD organs for OLT has allowed many transplant programs to afford patients access to an otherwise scarce resource and to maintain center volume. Although overall posttransplant outcomes are inferior to results with optimal, whole-liver grafts, aggressive utilization of ECD and DCD organs significantly lowers median wait-times for OLT, MELD score at OLT, and death while awaiting transplantation. It is incumbent on the transplant community to provide continued scrutiny of the many factors involved in ECD organ utilization, evaluate the degree of risk and benefit such allografts may impart on particular recipients, and thereby provide suitable “matching” to maximize favorable outcomes. Transplant caregivers need to provide patients with evidence-based care decisions, be good stewards of a scarce resource, and maintain threshold survival results for their programs. This requires balancing the urgency with which a transplant is needed and the utility of such a transplant. There is a clear necessity to pursue additional donor research to improve use of these marginal grafts and assess interventions that enhance the safety of ECD livers.

Living donor liver transplantation from a donor previously treated with interferon for hepatitis C virus: a case report

Introduction

Selecting a marginal donor in liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial but is necessary because of the small number of available donors.

Case presentation

A 46-year-old Japanese woman was a candidate to donate her liver to her brother, who had decompensated liver cirrhosis of unknown origin. Eight years before the donation, she had a mild liver dysfunction that was diagnosed as a hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection (serotype 2). She had received anti-viral therapy with interferon α-2b three times weekly for 24 weeks and had a sustained viral response (SVR). A biopsy of her liver before the donation showed normal findings without any active hepatitis, and her serum was negative for HCV-RNA. Only 67 patients have undergone LT from a cadaveric donor in Japan. The family in this case decided to have living donor LT. A careful selection for the liver graft donation was made; however, since she was the only candidate, we approved her as a living donor. She was discharged nine days after the liver donation. Her liver function recovered immediately. A computed tomography scan showed sufficient liver regeneration one year later. Her brother also had good liver function after LT and had no HCV infection 48 months after surgery and no de novo malignancy. Neither of the siblings has developed an HCV infection.

Conclusions

A patient with SVR status after interferon therapy might be considered a candidate for living donor LT but only if there are no other possibilities of LT for the recipient. A careful follow-up of the donor after donation is needed. The recipient also must have a very close follow-up because it is difficult to predict what might happen to the graft with post-transplant immunosuppression.

Liver allografts from hepatitis C positive donors can offer good outcomes in hepatitis C positive recipients: a US National Transplant Registry analysis

Organ donors are screened for the hepatitis C antibody (anti-HCV) and those with positive tests can be used under extended criteria donation. However, there is still a question of long-term organ viability. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcomes of anti-HCV positive (HCV+) liver grafts. The US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Scientific Registry was reviewed for the period from April 1994 to February 6, 2008 and 56,275 liver transplantations were analyzed. In total, there were 19,496 HCV+ recipients and 934 HCV+ donors. Patient and graft survival were assessed accounting for both donor and recipient anti-HCV status. Multivariable proportional hazards survival models were developed to adjust for factors known to affect post-transplant survival. With anti-HCV negative (HCV-) recipient/HCV- donor as the reference, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was similar for HCV+ recipient/HCV- donor compared with HCV+ recipient/HCV+ donor (1.176 vs. 1.165, P = 0.91). Our results suggest that HCV+ liver donors do not subject the HCV+ recipient to an increased risk for death over the HCV- donor, keeping in mind that careful donor and recipient selection is critical for the proper use of these extended criteria donors.

[How can the number of liver transplantations be increased?]

The number of patients suitable for liver transplantation is progressively increasing due to the excellent results achieved with this procedure, giving rise to a growing imbalance in the number of candidates on the waiting list and the number of donors. This situation has prompted transplant teams to search for alternatives to increase the number of liver grafts. On the one hand, the criteria for donation have been broadened to include donors with advanced age, liver steatosis, hepatitis B and C viruses, neoplasms, and benign underlying diseases. On the other hand, new transplant techniques have been used with grafts from split livers, living donors, sequential or domino transplants and non-heart-beating donors. Other options such as xenotransplantation and hepatocyte transplants currently lack clinical applicability.

No difference in clinical transplant outcomes for local and imported liver allografts

In the United States, liver allograft allocation is strictly regulated. Local centers have the first option to accept a donor liver; this is followed by regional allocation for those donor livers not used locally and then by national allocation for those donor livers not accepted regionally. This study reviews the outcomes of all liver allografts used over 6 years (2001-2007) and evaluates initial and long-term function stratified by the geographic source of the donor liver allograft. The records for 845 consecutive deceased donor liver transplants at a single center were reviewed. The geographic origin of the allograft was recorded along with donor and graft characteristics to determine the probable reason for graft refusal. Within our local organ procurement organization, there is 1 liver transplant center, and within the region, there are 8 active centers. Early graft failure included any graft loss within 7 days of transplant, and initial function was measured with liver enzymes 30 days post-transplant. Graft survival and patient survival were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox survival modeling. Median follow-up was 43 months. The geographic distribution of organs included local organs (562, 66%), regionally imported organs (126, 15%), and nationally imported organs (157, 19%). There were no differences between the 3 groups in initial graft function, intraoperative death, or early graft loss. Survival curves for the 3 study groups demonstrated no difference in survival up to 5 years post-transplant. In conclusion, liver allografts rejected for use by a large number of transplant centers can still be successfully used without early graft function or long-term survival being affected.

Hepatitis C and liver transplantation: enhancing outcomes and should patients be retransplanted

Hepatitis C (HCV)-related end-stage liver disease is the most common indication for liver transplantation. Safe expansion of the donor pool with improved rates of deceased donation and more widespread use of living and extended criteria donation are likely to decrease wait list mortality. In addition, improved antiviral treatments and a better understanding of the delicate balance between under- and over-immunosuppression in this population are needed. Finally, when recurrent advanced fibrosis occurs, the criteria for patient selection for retransplantation remain widely debated. This article reviews the literature on these topics and the work being done in each area to maximize outcomes in patients receiving transplants for HCV-related cirrhosis.