The UK-DCD-Risk-Score - practical and new guidance for allocation of a specific organ to a recipient?

Complications in Post-Liver Transplant Patients

Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for liver failure and selected cases of malignancies. Transplantation activity has increased over the years, and indications for LT have been widened, leading to organ shortage. To face this condition, a high selection of recipients with prioritizing systems and an enlargement of the donor pool were necessary. Several authors published their case series reporting the results obtained with the use of marginal donors, which seem to have progressively improved over the years. The introduction of in situ and ex situ machine perfusion, although still strongly debated, and better knowledge and treatment of the complications may have a role in achieving better results. With longer survival rates, a significant number of patients will suffer from long-term complications. An extensive review of the literature concerning short- and long-term outcomes is reported trying to highlight the most recent findings. The heterogeneity of the behaviors within the different centers is evident, leading to a difficult comparison of the results and making explicit the need to obtain more consent from experts.

Liver perfusion strategies: what is best and do ischemia times still matter?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes recent developments in the field of liver perfusion techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

Dynamic preservation techniques are increasingly tested due to the urgent need to improve the overall poor donor utilization. With their exposure to warm ischemia, livers from donors after circulatory death (DCD) transmit additional risk for severe complications after transplantation. Although the superiority of dynamic approaches compared to static-cold-storage is widely accepted, the number of good quality studies remains limited. Most risk factors, particularly donor warm ischemia, and accepted thresholds are inconsistently reported, leading to difficulties to assess the impact of new preservation technologies. Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) leads to good outcomes after DCD liver transplantation, with however short ischemia times. While randomized controlled trials (RCT) with NRP are lacking, results from the first RCTs with ex-situ perfusion were reported. Hypothermic oxygenated perfusion was shown to protect DCD liver recipients from ischemic cholangiopathy. In contrast, endischemic normothermic perfusion seems to not impact on the development of biliary complications, although this evidence is only available from retrospective studies.

SUMMARY

Dynamic perfusion strategies impact posttransplant outcomes and are increasingly commissioned in various countries along with more evidence from RCTs. Transparent reporting of risk and utilization with uniform definitions is required to compare the role of different preservation strategies in DCD livers with prolonged ischemia times.

The Suitability of Potential Organ Donors Using Real Case-Scenarios; Do we Need to Create a "Donor Board" Process for Donors Perceived as Unlikely Suitable?

Introduction: Despite availability of selection criteria, different interpretations can lead to variability in the appreciation of donor eligibility with possible viable organs missed. Our primary objective was to test the perception of feasibility of potential organ donors through the survey of a small sample of external evaluators.

Methods: Clinical scenarios summarizing 66 potential donors managed in the first year of our Organ Recovery Center were sent to four critical care physicians to evaluate the feasibility of the potential donors and the probability of organ procurement.

Results: Potential donors procuring at least one organ were identified in 55 of the 66 cases (83%). Unanimity was reached in 38 cases, encompassing 35 out of the 55 converted and 3 of the non-converted donors. The overall agreement was moderate (kappa = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.37–0.82). For the organs finally procured for transplantation, organ donation was predicted for the majority of the cases, but high discrepancy was present with the final outcome of organs not procured (particularly liver and kidney).

Conclusion: The assessment of a potential donor is a complex dynamic process. In order to increase organ availability, standardized electronically clinical data, as well a “donor board” structure of decision might inform future systems.

Temporal Trends in Utilization and Outcomes of DCD Livers in the United States

BACKGROUND

Historically, donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers were frequently discarded because of higher mortality and graft loss after liver transplantation (LT). However, the demand for LT continues to outstrip the supply of "acceptable" organs. Additionally, changes in the donor pool, organ allocation, and clinical management of donors and recipients, and improved clinical protocols might have altered post-DCD-LT outcomes.

METHODS

We studied 5975 recovered DCD livers using US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2005 to 2017, with a comparison group of 78 235 adult donation after brain death (DBD) livers recovered during the same time period. We quantified temporal trends in discard using adjusted multilevel logistic regression and temporal trends in post-LT mortality and graft loss for DCD LT recipients using adjusted Cox regression.

RESULTS

DCD livers were more likely to be discarded than DBD livers across the entire study period, and the relative likelihood of discard increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of discard DCD versus DBD 3.854.455.14 2005-2007, 5.225.876.59 2015-2017) despite improving outcomes after DCD LT. Mortality risk for DCD LTs decreased in each time period (compared with 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.720.840.97, aHR 2012-2014 0.480.580.70, aHR 2015-2017 0.340.430.55), as did risk of graft loss (compared with 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.690.810.94, aHR 2012-2014 0.450.550.67, aHR 2015-2017 0.360.450.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite dramatic improvements in outcomes of DCD LT recipients, DCD livers remain substantially more likely to be discarded than DBD livers, and this discrepancy has actually increased over time. DCD livers are underutilized and have the potential to expand the donor pool.

Applicability of the UK DCD Risk Score in the modern era of liver transplantation: a U.S. update

Careful graft and recipient selection have resulted in improved outcomes in liver transplantation (LT) using donation after cardiac death (DCD) organs. The UK DCD Risk Score was established as a risk stratification tool to guide selection. We evaluated the applicability of the UK DCD Risk Score in a contemporary US cohort of adult DCD LT recipients using the United Network for Organ Sharing registry (2011-2020). 3,899 DCD LTs were included in our study (UK DCD Risk Score 0-5 points: 1,438 [36.9%], 6-9 points: 1,920 [49.2%]; 10-20 points: 541 [13.9%]). Compared to a score of 6-9 points, a score of 0-5 points was associated with decreased risk of graft loss (HR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.68-0.94, P = 0.006), while a score of 10-20 points was associated with increased risk of graft loss (HR = 1.23, 95%CI: 1.01-1.51, P = 0.04). The 5-year graft survival for patients with risk scores of 0-5, 6-9, and 10-20 were 75.9%, 71.7%, and 67.9%, respectively. The C-statistic for the UK DCD Risk Score in our contemporary cohort was 0.611. The UK DCD Risk Score demonstrates a more limited ability to differentiate recipient outcomes in the modern era of DCD LT in the US. Acceptable long-term outcomes are achievable for patients stratified to the highest-risk group. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Recommendations for Donor and Recipient Selection and Risk Prediction: Working Group Report From the ILTS Consensus Conference in DCD Liver Transplantation

Although the utilization of donation after circulatory death donors (DCDs) for liver transplantation (LT) has increased steadily, much controversy remains, and no common acceptance criteria exist with regard to donor and recipient risk factors and prediction models. A consensus conference was organized by International Liver Transplantation Society on January 31, 2020, in Venice, Italy, to review the current clinical practice worldwide regarding DCD-LT and to develop internationally accepted guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the grade system. International experts in this field were allocated to 6 working groups and prepared evidence-based recommendations to answer-specific questions considering the currently available literature. Working group members and conference attendees served as jury to edit and confirm the final recommendations presented at the end of the conference by each working group separately. This report presents the final statements and recommendations provided by working group 2, covering the entire spectrum of donor and recipient risk factors and prediction models in DCD-LT.

Viability Assessment in Liver Transplantation-What Is the Impact of Dynamic Organ Preservation?

Based on the continuous increase of donor risk, with a majority of organs classified as marginal, quality assessment and prediction of liver function is of utmost importance. This is also caused by the notoriously lack of effective replacement of a failing liver by a device or intensive care treatment. While various parameters of liver function and injury are well-known from clinical practice, the majority of specific tests require prolonged diagnostic time and are more difficult to assess ex situ. In addition, viability assessment of procured organs needs time, because the development of the full picture of cellular injury and the initiation of repair processes depends on metabolic active tissue and reoxygenation with full blood over several hours or days. Measuring injury during cold storage preservation is therefore unlikely to predict the viability after transplantation. In contrast, dynamic organ preservation strategies offer a great opportunity to assess organs before implantation through analysis of recirculating perfusates, bile and perfused liver tissue. Accordingly, several parameters targeting hepatocyte or cholangiocyte function or metabolism have been recently suggested as potential viability tests before organ transplantation. We summarize here a current status of respective machine perfusion tests, and report their clinical relevance.

Transplant Outcomes of Donation After Circulatory Death Livers Recovered With Versus Without Premortem Heparin Administration

Premortem heparin administration during donation after circulatory death (DCD) organ recovery is thought to optimize liver perfusion. However, premortem heparinization is not universally practiced in the United States and limited data exist regarding its utility. US registry data were accessed between January 1, 2003, and March 10, 2017, and 2 cohorts were ascertained: (1) DCD donor livers recovered for transplantation (n = 5495) and (2) liver-only adult transplant recipients of DCD livers (n = 3754). Exclusions were donor unknown heparin status (n = 40), positive donor hepatitis B surface antigen (n = 4) and hepatitis C virus (n = 120) serologies, and for the outcomes analysis, livers placed outside the United States (n = 10). Discard rates and graft outcomes were examined from cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Of 5495 DCD livers recovered for transplant, 589 (10.7%) donors did not receive premortem heparin (no heparin) and the remaining 4906 (89.3%) received heparin (heparin). Liver discard was similar between the no heparin (30.6%) and heparin groups (30.8%; P = 0.90). Heparin status was not associated with liver discard on multivariate analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-1.18 P = 0.76). The cumulative probability of overall graft survival was lower in the no heparin group relative to the heparin group (P < 0.05), and this finding persisted on multivariate analysis. No heparin group transplants had an 18% higher hazard of overall graft failure compared with those that received heparin (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.38; P < 0.05). In conclusion, organ recovery heparin administration status was not associated with liver discard. Failure to pretreat organ donors with premortem heparin correlates with worse liver transplant graft survival compared with heparin-treated livers.