Functional status of patients before liver transplantation as a predictor of posttransplant mortality

The impact of Karnofsky performance status on prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Functional performance as measured by the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale has been linked to the outcomes of liver transplant patients; however, the effect of KPS on the outcomes of the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) liver transplant population has not been fully elucidated. We aimed to investigate the association between pre-transplant KPS score and long-term outcomes in HCC patients listed for liver transplantation.

METHODS

Adult HCC candidates listed on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2017 were grouped into group I (KPS 80-100%, n = 8,379), group II (KPS 50-70%, n = 8,091), and group III (KPS 10-40%, n = 1,256) based on percentage KPS score at listing. Survival was compared and multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors.

RESULTS

Patients with low KPS score had a higher risk of removal from the waiting list. The 5-year intent-to-treat survival was 57.7% in group I, 53.2% in group II and 46.7% in group III (P < 0.001). The corresponding overall survival was 77.6%, 73.7% and 66.3% in three groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that KPS was an independent predictor of intent-to-treat survival (P < 0.001, reference group I; HR 1.19 [95%CI 1.07-1.31] for group II, P = 0.001; HR 1.63 [95%CI 1.34-1.99] for group III, P < 0.001) and overall survival(P < 0.001, reference group I; HR 1.16 [95%CI 1.05-1.28] for group II, P = 0.004; HR 1.53 [95%CI 1.26-1.87] for group III, P < 0.001). The cumulative 5-year recurrence rates was higher in group III patients (7.4%), compared with 5.2% in group I and 5.5% in group II (P = 0.037). However, this was not significant in the competing regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Low pre-transplant KPS score is associated with inferior long-term survival in liver transplant HCC patients, but is not significantly associated with post-transplant tumor recurrence.

Systematic review: the role of frailty in advanced chronic liver disease

BACKGROUND

Frailty is a known predictor of outcome and mortality in patients undergoing liver transplantation. However, most patients remain unsuitable transplant candidates. It is not yet known if the assessment of frailty in non-transplant candidates can aid prognostication.

AIM

To collate and interrogate the various frailty tools presently used to predict mortality in the non-transplant cirrhosis setting.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for articles published from inception to March 2022 was undertaken, excluding those where patients underwent transplantation or had hepatocellular carcinoma.

RESULTS

We identified 12 observational cohort studies, featuring 9 frailty indices. These were from various global healthcare settings and of fair or good quality. Most were objective tools utilising clinician-based assessments. All frailty scores predicted prognosis, with variability in the method of application, and utilisation in long- or short-term mortality. Three studies directly compared different indices in the same population. There was some evidence that simple tools could perform as well, if not better, than more complex, time-consuming scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Various frailty tools can reproducibly evaluate mortality in patients with cirrhosis who are ineligible for transplant. However, further prospective head-to-head comparative studies are needed. In addition to determining model utility, studies should focus on important relative considerations which may limit widespread implementation including, ease of use and limited resources, given the global disparity of liver care provision. These tools may positively identify specific patient cohorts at risk of impending deterioration, thereby stratifying those patients likely to benefit from early integration with palliative care.

Survival After Liver Transplantation: An International Comparison Between the United States and the United Kingdom in the Years 2008-2016

BACKGROUND

Compared with the United States, risk-adjusted mortality in the United Kingdom has historically been worse in the first 90 d following liver transplantation (LT) and better thereafter. In the last decade, there has been considerable change in the practice of LT internationally, but no contemporary large-scale international comparison of posttransplant outcomes has been conducted. This study aimed to determine disease-specific short- and long-term mortality of LT recipients in the United States and the United Kingdom.

METHODS

This retrospective international multicenter cohort study analyzed adult (≥18 y) first-time LT recipients between January 2, 2008, and December 31, 2016, using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing and the UK Transplant Registry databases. Time-dependent Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) comparing disease-specific risk-adjusted mortality in the first 90 d post-LT, between 90 d and 1 y, and between 1 and 5 y.

RESULTS

Forty-two thousand eight hundred seventy-four US and 4950 UK LT recipients were included. The main LT indications in the United States and the United Kingdom were hepatocellular carcinoma (25.4% and 24.9%, respectively) and alcohol-related liver disease (20.3% and 27.1%, respectively). There were no differences in mortality during the first 90 d post-LT (reference: United States; HR, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.12). However, between 90 d and 1 y (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.85) and 1 and 5 y (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.63-0.81]) the United Kingdom had lower mortality. The mortality differences between 1 and 5 y were most marked in hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.88) and alcohol-related liver disease patients (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-adjusted mortality in the United States and the United Kingdom was similar in the first 90 d post-LT but better in the United Kingdom thereafter. International comparisons of LT may highlight differences in healthcare delivery and help benchmarking by identifying modifiable factors that can facilitate improved global outcomes in LT.

A decline in functional status while awaiting liver transplantation is predictive of increased post-transplantation mortality

BACKGROUND

Functional status (FS) is dynamic and changes over time. We examined how changes in FS while awaiting liver transplantation influence post-transplant outcomes.

METHODS

Data on adult liver transplants performed in the United States during the MELD era were obtained through September 2020. Patient and graft survival were compared between groups with no change or improved FS, and those with worsening FS.

RESULTS

Of the 90,210 transplant recipients included in the analysis, 39,193 (43%) had worsening FS, which was associated with longer waiting-list time (187 vs. 329 days, p < 0.001) and worse patient survival after liver transplant (1858 vs. 1727 days, p < 0.001). A consistent and dose-dependent relationship was observed for each 10-point decrease in Karnofsky Performance Score and post-transplant survival. Multivariable regression analysis confirmed that a decline in FS was associated with worse patient survival (HR 1.15, p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed for graft survival.

CONCLUSION

A decline in FS on the waiting-list is associated with significantly greater post-liver transplant mortality in recipients. These results should be taken into consideration when allocating organs and determining transplant candidacy. Strategies to optimize FS prior to transplantation should be prioritized as even subtle decreases in FS are associated with inferior post-transplantation outcomes.

Impact of pretransplant frailty and sarcopenia on the post-transplant prognosis of patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Frailty and sarcopenia associate with increased mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis on the transplant waitlist. We conducted a systematic review on the impact of pretransplant frailty and sarcopenia on post-transplant outcomes in adult patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a search in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central. Of the 12276 references initially recovered, 34 were included.

RESULTS

Frailty and sarcopenia presented a negative impact on post-transplant outcomes and seemed to associate with an overall two-fold reduction in early and 50% reduction in late survival, for severe conditions, according to the largest cohorts. These patients required longer ICU and hospitalization time, had higher rates of sepsis and respiratory complications and lower graft-survival. The reversibility of frailty depended on the severity of functional impairment and on the co-morbidities contributing to frailty. Reversibility of sarcopenia occurred in only a minority of patients, in unbiased studies.

CONCLUSION

Frailty and sarcopenia are double-edged swords: patients with frailty/sarcopenia should be prioritized for liver transplantation due to increased mortality on the waitlist; however, severe frailty/sarcopenia may justify delisting because it associates with dismal prognosis post-liver transplantation. Patients presenting mild to moderate frailty/sarcopenia, should be submitted to liver transplantation before those conditions worsen to a level that significantly impacts post-liver transplantation outcomes.

National time trends in mortality and graft survival following liver transplantation from circulatory death or brainstem death donors

BACKGROUND

Despite high waiting list mortality rates, concern still exists on the appropriateness of using livers donated after circulatory death (DCD). We compared mortality and graft loss in recipients of livers donated after circulatory or brainstem death (DBD) across two successive time periods.

METHODS

Observational multinational data from the United Kingdom and Ireland were partitioned into two time periods (2008-2011 and 2012-2016). Cox regression methods were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing the impact of periods on post-transplant mortality and graft failure.

RESULTS

A total of 1176 DCD recipients and 3749 DBD recipients were included. Three-year patient mortality rates decreased markedly from 19.6 per cent in time period 1 to 10.4 per cent in time period 2 (adjusted HR 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.30 to 0.62; P < 0.001) for DCD recipients but only decreased from 12.8 to 11.3 per cent (adjusted HR 0.96, 95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 1.19; P = 0.732) in DBD recipients (P for interaction = 0.001). No time period-specific improvements in 3-year graft failure were observed for DCD (adjusted HR 0.80, 95% c.i. 0.61 to 1.05; P = 0.116) or DBD recipients (adjusted HR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.79 to 1.14; P = 0.607). A slight increase in retransplantation rates occurred between time period 1 and 2 in those who received a DCD liver (from 7.3 to 11.8 per cent; P = 0.042), but there was no change in those receiving a DBD liver (from 4.9 to 4.5 per cent; P = 0.365). In time period 2, no difference in mortality rates between those receiving a DCD liver and those receiving a DBD liver was observed (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% c.i. 0.56 to 1.09; P = 0.142).

CONCLUSION

Mortality rates more than halved in recipients of a DCD liver over a decade and eventually compared similarly to mortality rates in recipients of a DBD liver. Regions with high waiting list mortality may mitigate this by use of DCD livers.

Inferior outcomes in young adults undergoing liver transplantation - a UK and Ireland cohort study

Graft loss incidence is reported to be inversely related to recipient age. We used a national cohort of liver transplant (LT) recipients from the United Kingdom and Ireland to compare the age-dependent risk of graft failure in different post-transplantation time-periods ('epochs'). A cohort of first-time LT recipients (1995-2016) were identified (11 006). Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing graft loss between age-groups (18-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59 and 60-76 years) and graft loss in different post-transplant epochs: 0-90 days, 90 days-2 years and 2-10 years. The risk of graft failure was highest in those transplanted between age 18 and 29 (adjusted HR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.00-1.57, P = 0.04) and in those aged 30-39 (adjusted HR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11-1.55, P = 0.02). Graft failure in those under the age of 40 was similar in the first 90 days but worse 2-10 years' post-LT (18-29 years HR 1.36, 95% CI: 0.96-1.93, P < 0.001). Graft failure because of chronic rejection (CR) was more common in recipients aged 18-29 (P < 0.001). Adults transplanted between age 18 and 39 are at risk of late graft loss. CR is a concern for young adults (18-29 years). Our data highlights the need for specialist young adult services within adult healthcare.

The Impact of Performance Status on Length of Hospital Stay and Clinical Complications Following Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Impaired pretransplant performance status (PS) is associated with chronic liver disease (CLD). We studied its impact on hospital length of stay (LOS), complications, and readmissions in the first year after liver transplantation.

METHODS

The Standard National Liver Transplant Registry was linked to a hospital administrative dataset, and all first-time liver transplant recipients with CLD aged ≥18 years in England were identified. A modified 3-level Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score was used to assess PS. Linear- and logistic-fixed effect regression models were used to estimate the effect of specific posttransplant complications and readmissions in the first year after transplantation.

RESULTS

Six thousand nine hundred sixty-eight recipients were included. Impaired PS was associated with an increased LOS in the initial posttransplant period (comparing ECOG 1-3, adjusted difference 7.2 d; 95% confidence [CI], 4.8-9.6; P < 0.001) and in time spent on the ITU (adjusted difference 1.2 d; 95% CI, 0.4-2.0; P < 0.001). There was no significant association between ECOG status and total LOS of later admissions (adjusted difference, 2.5 d; 95% CI, -0.4-5.5; P = 0.23). Those with a poorer ECOG status had an increased incidence of renal failure (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0; P = 0.004) and infection (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4; P = 0.02) but not an increased incidence of readmission (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5; P = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

In liver transplant recipients with CLD, impaired pretransplant PS is associated with prolonged LOS in the immediate posttransplant period but not with LOS of later admissions in the first year after transplantation. Impaired PS increased the risk of renal failure and infection.

Prediction of Perioperative Cardiovascular Events in Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of liver cirrhosis with poor survival in the absence of liver transplantation (LT). HRS represents a state of profound circulatory and cardiac dysfunction. Whether it increases risk of perioperative major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) following LT remains unclear.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 560 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac workup for LT of whom 319 proceeded to LT. All patients underwent standardized assessment including dobutamine stress echocardiography. HRS was defined according to International Club of Ascites criteria.

RESULTS

Primary outcome of 30-day MACE occurred in 74 (23.2%) patients. A significantly higher proportion of patients with HRS experienced MACE (31 [41.9%] versus 54 [22.0%]; P = 0.001). After adjusting for age, model for end-stage liver disease score, cardiovascular risk index, history of coronary artery disease, and a positive stress test, HRS remained an independent predictor for MACE (odds ratio [OR], 2.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-5.78). Other independent predictors included poor functional status (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.41-8.13), pulmonary hypertension (OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.17-5.56), and beta-blocker use (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.10-6.48). Occurrence of perioperative MACE was associated with a trend toward poor age-adjusted survival over 3.6-year follow-up (hazard ratio, 2.0; 95% CI, 0.98-4.10; P = 0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

HRS, beta-blocker use, pulmonary hypertension, and poor functional status were all associated with over a 2-fold higher risk of MACE following LT. Whether inclusion of these variables in routine preoperative assessment can facilitate cardiac risk stratification warrants further study.

Physiologic Reserve Assessment and Application in Clinical and Research Settings in Liver Transplantation

Physiologic reserve is an important prognostic indicator. Because of its complexity, no single test can measure an individual's physiologic reserve. Frailty is the phenotypic expression of decreased reserve and portends poor prognosis. Both subjective and objective tools have been used to measure one or more components of physiologic reserve. Most of these tools appear to predict pretransplant mortality, but only some predict posttransplant survival. Incorporation of these measures of physiologic reserve in the clinical and research settings including prediction models are reviewed, and the applicability to patient-related outcomes are discussed. Commonly used tools, in patients with cirrhosis, that have been associated with clinical outcomes were reviewed. The strength of subjective tools lies in low-cost, wide availability, and quick assessments at the bedside. A disadvantage of these tools is the manipulative capacity, restricting their value in allocation processes. The strength of objective tests lies in objective measurements and the ability to measure change. The disadvantages include complexity, increased cost, and limited accessibility. Heterogeneity in the definitions and tools used has prevented further advancement or a clear role in transplant assessment. Consistent use of objective tools, including the 6-minute walk test, gait speed, Liver Frailty Index, or Short Physical Performance Battery, are recommended in clinical and research settings.

Preoperative Stratification of Liver Transplant Recipients: Validation of the LTRS

BACKGROUND

The liver transplant risk score (LTRS) was developed to stratify 90-day mortality of patients referred for liver transplantation (LT). We aimed to validate the LTRS using a new cohort of patients.

METHODS

The LTRS stratifies the risk of 90-day mortality of LT recipients based on their age, body mass index, diabetes, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and need for dialysis. We assessed the performance of the LTRS using a new cohort of patients transplanted in the United States between July 2013 and June 2017. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years, ABO incompatibility, redo or multivisceral transplants, partial grafts, malignancies other than hepatocellular carcinoma and fulminant hepatitis.

RESULTS

We found a linear correlation between the number of points of the LTRS and 90-day mortality. Among 18 635 recipients, 90-day mortality was 2.7%, 3.8%, 5.2%, 4.8%, 6.7%, and 9.3% for recipients with 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 points (P < 0.001). The LTRS also stratified 1-year mortality that was 5.5%, 7.7%, 9.9%, 9.3%, 10.8%, and 15.4% for 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 points (P < 0.001). An inverse correlation was found between the LTRS and 4-year survival that was 82%, 79%, 78%, 82%, 78%, and 66% for patients with 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 points (P < 0.001). The LTRS remained an independent predictor after accounting for recipient sex, ethnicity, cause of liver disease, donor age, cold ischemia time, and waiting time.

CONCLUSIONS

The LTRS can stratify the short- and long-term outcomes of LT recipients at the time of their evaluations irrespective of their gender, ethnicity, and primary cause of liver disease.

Assessing the Time-Dependent Impact of Performance Status on Outcomes After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Identifying how the prognostic impact of performance status (PS) differs according to indication, era, and time period ("epoch") after liver transplantation (LT) could have implications for selection and treatment of patients on the waitlist. We used national data from the United Kingdom and Ireland to assess impact of PS on mortality separately for HCC and non-HCC recipients.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We assessed pre-LT PS using the 5-point modified Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale and used Cox regression methods to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) that compared posttransplantation mortality in different epochs of follow-up (0-90 days and 90 days to 1 year) and in different eras of transplantation (1995-2005 and 2006-2016). 2107 HCC and 10,693 non-HCC patients were included. One-year survival decreased with worsening PS in non-HCC recipients where 1-year survival was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.3-94.4) in those able to carry out normal activity (PS1) compared to 78.7% (95% CI, 76.7-80.5) in those completely reliant on care (PS5). For HCC patients, these estimates were 89.9% (95% CI, 85.4-93.2) and 83.1% (95% CI, 61.0-93.3), respectively. Reduction in survival in non-HCC patients with poorer PS was in the first 90 days after transplant, with no major effect observed between 90 days and 1 year. Adjustment for donor and recipient characteristics did not change the findings. Comparing era, post-LT mortality improved for HCC (adjusted HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.74) and non-HCC recipients (0.48; 95% CI, 0.42-0.55), but this did not differ according to PS score (P = 0.39 and 0.61, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Impact on mortality of the recipient's pretransplant PS is principally limited to the first 3 months after LT. Over time, mortality has improved for both HCC and non-HCC recipients and across the full range of PS.

Liver transplantation outcomes after transarterial chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation is widespread, although evidence that it improves outcomes is lacking and there exist concerns about morbidity. The impact of TACE on outcomes after transplantation was evaluated in this study.

Methods

Patients with HCC who had liver transplantation in the UK were identified, and stratified according to whether they received TACE between 2006 and 2016. Cox regression methods were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for death and graft failure after transplantation adjusted for donor and recipient characteristics.

Results

In total, 385 of 968 patients (39·8 per cent) received TACE. Five-year patient survival after transplantation was similar in those who had or had not received TACE: 75·2 (95 per cent c.i. 68·8 to 80·5) and 75·0 (70·5 to 78·8) per cent respectively. After adjustment for donor and recipient characteristics, there were no differences in mortality (HR 0·96, 95 per cent c.i. 0·67 to 1·38; P = 0·821) or graft failure (HR 1·01, 0·73 to 1·40; P = 0·964). The number of TACE treatments (2 or more versus 1: HR 0·97, 0·61 to 1·55; P = 0·903) or the time of death after transplantation (within or after 90 days; P = 0·291) did not alter the outcome. The incidence of hepatic artery thrombosis was low in those who had or had not received TACE (1·3 and 2·4 per cent respectively; P = 0·235).

Conclusion

TACE delivered to patients with HCC before liver transplant did not affect complications, patient death or graft failure after transplantation.

Short- and long-term mortality after liver transplantation in patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma in the UK

Background

The increasing demand for liver transplantation has led to considerable changes in characteristics of donors and recipients. This study evaluated the short- and long-term mortality of recipients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the UK between 1997 and 2016.

Methods

First-time elective adult liver transplant recipients in the UK were identified and four successive eras of transplantation were compared. Hazard ratios (HRs) comparing the impact of era on short-term (first 90 days) and longer-term (from 90 days to 5 years) mortality were estimated, with adjustment for recipient and donor characteristics.

Results

Some 1879 recipients with and 7661 without HCC were included. There was an increase in use of organs donated after circulatory death (DCD), from 0 per cent in era 1 to 35·2 per cent in era 4 for recipients with HCC, and from 0·2 to 24·1 per cent for non-HCC recipients. The 3-year mortality rate decreased from 28·3 per cent in era 1 to 16·9 per cent in era 4 (adjusted HR 0·47, 95 per cent c.i. 0·35 to 0·63) for recipients with HCC, and from 20·4 to 9·3 per cent (adjusted HR 0·44, 0·36 to 0·53) for those without HCC. Comparing era 4 with era 1, improvements were more marked in short-term than in long-term mortality, both for recipients with HCC (0–90 days: adjusted HR 0·20, 0·10 to 0·39; 90 days to 5 years: adjusted HR 0·52, 0·35 to 0·75; P = 0·043) and for non-HCC recipients (0–90 days: adjusted HR 0·32, 0·24 to 0·42; 90 days to 5 years: adjusted HR 0·52, 0·40 to 0·67; P = 0·024).

Conclusion

In the past 20 years, the mortality rate after liver transplantation has more than halved, despite increasing use of DCD donors. Improvements in overall survival can be explained by decreases in short-term and longer-term mortality.

Poor Performance Status Predicts Mortality After Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Performance status may adversely affect living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) outcomes. We present our data regarding performance status and posttransplantation survival in a large LDLT cohort.

METHODS

Patients with ABO incompatibility, of pediatric age, with acute liver failure, with hepatocellular carcinoma, and/or who had incomplete data were excluded. Two hundred sixty adults who had decompensated cirrhosis and underwent LDLT from January 2016 to March 2018 were included. Performance status was assessed by Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS). The data are depicted as number, mean (SD), or median (25-75 interquartile range [IQR]).

RESULTS

The cohort included 232 males and 28 females, aged 48.3 ± 9.8 years. Etiology of liver disease was hepatitis B in 33, hepatitis C in 19, alcohol related in 120, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis/cryptogenic in 68, and other etiologies in 20 patients. The mean Child's score was 9.6 ± 1.7, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 18.0 ± 5.8, and donor age was 33.4 ± 9.9 years. Forty-one recipients died at median follow-up of 11 months. The KPS was 100 in 6 (no deaths), 90 in 53 (2 deaths), 80 in 93 (12 deaths), 70 in 69 (14 deaths), 60 in 26 (8 deaths), and 50 in 13 (5 deaths) (P = 0.003). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of KPS to predict mortality was 0.698 (P = 0.000, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.616-0.780), and the best sensitivity (63%) and specificity (67%) were achieved at KPS ≤70. The survivors and nonsurvivors had a significant difference with respect to KPS (77.6 ± 10.9 versus 69.5 ± 10.9, P 0.000), age of the patient (47.8 ± 9.4 versus 51.1 ± 11.7; P = 0.047), postoperative infections (53.8% versus 85.3%, P = 0.001), and need of packed red cells transfusion. Multivariate analysis (Cox proportional-hazard) showed KPS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.93-0.99, P = 0.007), postoperative infections (HR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.04-5.1, P = 0.038), and recipient age (HR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.002-1.07, P = 0.039) as predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSION

Pretransplant performance status is one of the predictors of mortality after LDLT.

Impact of recipient functional status on 1-year liver transplant outcomes

BACKGROUND

The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale has been widely validated for clinical practice for over 60 years.

AIM

To examine the extent to which poor pre-transplant functional status, assessed using the KPS scale, is associated with increased risk of mortality and/or graft failure at 1-year post-transplantation.

METHODS

This study included 38278 United States adults who underwent first, non-urgent, liver-only transplantation from 2005 to 2014 (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients). Functional impairment/disability was categorized as severe, moderate, or none/normal. Analyses were conducted using multivariable-adjusted Cox survival regression models.

RESULTS

The median age was 56 years, 31% were women, median pre-transplant Model for End-Stage for Liver Disease score was 18. Functional impairment was present in 70%; one-quarter of the sample was severely disabled. After controlling for key recipient and donor factors, moderately and severely disabled patients had a 1-year mortality rate of 1.32 [confidence interval (CI): 1.21-1.44] and 1.73 (95%CI: 1.56-1.91) compared to patients with no impairment, respectively. Subjects with moderate and severe disability also had a multivariable-adjusted 1-year graft failure rate of 1.13 (CI: 1.02-1.24) and 1.16 (CI: 1.02-1.31), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pre-transplant functional status is a useful prognostic indicator for 1-year post-transplant patient and graft survival.

Patient Functional Status at Transplant and Its Impact on Posttransplant Survival of Adult Deceased-donor Kidney Recipients

BACKGROUND

Recorded at the time of transplant and reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, patient's functional status is measured using the Karnofsky performance score (KPS), ranging 0 to 100. Functional status analysis may provide insights on candidate listing and posttransplant survival outcomes for deceased-donor kidney transplants.

METHODS

The cohort consisted of adult deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients transplanted beginning January 2007. One-year and 3-year Cox models for posttransplant survival were fitted with current Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) variables and KPS. Comparative analyses were performed between the SRTR model without KPS and augmented model with it. Using the augmented model, we examined the impact of Kidney Donor Profile Index on posttransplant survivals for 5 different KPS strata: 10 to 30, 40 to 50, 60 to 70, 80 to 90, and 100.

RESULTS

Comparative analyses showed that KPS was a statistically significant predictor for posttransplant survival: it improved model calibration, discrimination, and predictive accuracy. From the augmented model, the survival curves illustrated that recipients with KPS 40 to 50 and kidneys with Kidney Donor Profile Index as high as 99 have expected survival probabilities of above 90% in 1 year and above 80% in 3 years. The expected survival probabilities improve as KPS increases. Recipients with KPS 10 to 30 have the worst survival probability, even if they received high-quality kidneys.

CONCLUSIONS

Insights from the survival analyses recommend possible inclusion of functional status into SRTR's risk-adjusted models. Moreover, they invite further examination of its use to improve current listing and transplantation strategies at transplant centers and potentially reduce deceased-donor kidney discard rate.

Liver transplantation for critically ill cirrhotic patients: Overview and pragmatic proposals

Liver transplantation for critically ill cirrhotic patients with acute deterioration of liver function associated with extrahepatic organ failures is controversial. While transplantation has been shown to be beneficial on an individual basis, the potentially poorer post-transplant outcome of these patients taken as a group can be held as an argument against allocating livers to them. Although this issue concerns only a minority of liver transplants, it calls into question the very heart of the allocation paradigms in place. Indeed, most allocation algorithms have been centered on prioritizing the sickest patients by using the model for end-stage liver disease score. This has led to allocating increasing numbers of livers to increasingly critically ill patients without setting objective or consensual limits on how sick patients can be when they receive an organ. Today, finding robust criteria to deem certain cirrhotic patients too sick to be transplanted seems urgent in order to ensure the fairness of our organ allocation protocols. This review starts by fleshing out the argument that finding such criteria is essential. It examines five types of difficulties that have hindered the progress of recent literature on this issue and identifies various strategies that could be followed to move forward on this topic, taking into account the recent discussion on acute on chronic liver failure. We move on to review the literature along four axes that could guide clinicians in their decision-making process regarding transplantation of critically ill cirrhotic patients.

Karnofsky performance status before and after liver transplantation predicts graft and patient survival

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Karnofsky performance status (KPS) has been used for almost 70 years for clinical assessment of patients. Our objective was to determine whether KPS is an independent predictor of post-liver transplant (LT) survival after adjusting for known confounders.

METHOD

Adult patients listed with the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) from 2006 to 2016 were grouped into low (10-40%, n = 15,103), intermediate (50-70%, n = 22,183) and high (80-100%, n = 13,131) KPS groups based on KPS scores at the time of LT, after excluding those on ventilators or life support. We determined the trends in KPS before and after LT, and survival probabilities based on KPS.

RESULTS

There was a decline in KPS scores between listing and LT and there was significant improvement after LT. The graft and patient survival differences were significantly lower (p <0.0001) in those with low KPS. After adjusting for other confounders, the hazard ratios for graft failure were 1.17 (1.12-1.22, p <0.01) for the intermediate and 1.38 (1.31-1.46, p <0.01) for the low group. Similarly, hazard ratios for patient failure were 1.18 (1.13-1.24, p <0.01) for the intermediate and 1.43 (1.35-1.52, p <0.01) for the low group. Other independent negative predictors for graft and patient survival were older age, Black ethnicity, presence of hepatic encephalopathy and donor risk index. Those who did not show significant improvements in post-LT KPS scores had poorer outcomes in all three KPS groups, but it was most obvious in the low KPS group with one-year patient survival of 33%.

CONCLUSION

The KPS, before and after LT, is an independent predictor of graft and patient survival after adjusting for other important predictors of survival.

LAY SUMMARY

The overall health of liver transplant recipients could be assessed by a simple clinical assessment tool called the Karnofsky performance status, which assesses an individual's overall functional status on an 11-point scale, in increments of 10, where a score of 0 is considered dead and 100 is considered perfect health. In this study, using a large dataset, we show that the performance status before and after liver transplant is a predictor of survival. More importantly, those who have low performance status before transplant and do not show an improvement in performance status between 3-12 months after liver transplant have very poor survival.

Trends of characteristics and outcomes of donors and recipients of deceased donor liver transplantation in the United States: 1990 to 2013

AIM

To compare trends in donor/recipient characteristics and outcomes using four period cohorts of liver transplant recipients from 1990 to 2009.

METHODS

Seventy thousand three hundred and seventy-seven adult first-time recipients of whole-organ deceased-donor liver grafts from 1990 to 2009 were followed up until September 2013. Four periods based on transplantation dates were considered to account for developments in transplantation. Descriptive statistics were used to describe donor/recipient characteristics and transplant outcomes. Statistical comparisons between periods were performed using χ2/Fischer's exact test (categorical variables) and t-tests/Mann-Whitney U test (continuous variables). Univariate descriptive statistics/survival data were generated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox Proportional Hazards models were used for regression analyses of patient and graft survival.

RESULTS

Mean age (years), body mass index (kg/m2), and the proportion of males were, respectively, 39.1 (± 17.4), 25.9 (± 5.7) and 60.3 for donors, and 51.3 (± 10.5), 27.7 (± 5.6), and 64.4 for recipients. Donor and transplantation rates differed between racial/ethnic groups. Median (Q1-Q3) cold and warm ischemia, waitlist, and hospital stay times were 8 (6.0-10.0) h and 45 (35-59) min, 93 (21-278) d, and 12 (8-20) d. Total functional assistance was required by 8% of recipients at wait-listing and 13.4% at transplantation. Overall survival at 1, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years was 87.3%, 79.4%, 73.6%, 59.8%, 46.7%, and 35.9%, respectively. The 2005-2009 cohort had better patient and graft survival than the 1990-1994 cohort overall [HR 0.67 (0.62-0.72) and 0.66 (0.62-0.71)] and at five years [HR 0.73 (0.66-0.80) and 0.71 (0.65-0.77)].

CONCLUSION

Despite changes in donor quality, recipient characteristics, and declining functional status among transplant recipients, overall patient survival is superior and post-transplant outcomes continue to improve.

Functional status predicts postoperative mortality after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Frail patients are more vulnerable to perioperative stressors of liver transplantation (LT). Program Specific Reports, used in transplant center auditing, risk-adjust for frailty using the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale. We evaluate the extent to which functional impairment/disability is associated with increased risk of postoperative death.

METHODS

We included 24 505 first-time LT recipients from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (2006-2011). We categorized patients as Severe, Moderate, or Normal function/disability using the KPS scale and evaluated risk of 30- and 90-day mortality. Analyses took potential center-specific differences in KPS measurement protocols into account using hierarchal logistic modeling.

RESULTS

Over one-quarter of our population was Severely impaired/disabled, and 30.5% had no functional limitations. Severely and Moderately impaired/disabled patients had 2.56 (95% CI 1.91-3.44) and 1.40 (95% CI 1.10-1.78) times the odds of 30-day mortality, respectively, after adjusting for key recipient and donor factors. Estimates remained consistent regardless of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, medical condition, or clustering analyses by center. Technical/operative complications and multiorgan failure/hemorrhage were more common causes of death among more Severely disabled patients than in higher functioning groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-transplant functional status, assessed using the KPS scale, is a reliable predictor of post-LT mortality in the United States.

Poor Performance Status Is Associated With Increased Mortality in Patients With Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Functional status (a patient's ability to perform activities that meet basic needs, fulfill usual roles, and maintain health and well-being) has been linked to outcomes in patients with cirrhosis and can be measured by the Karnofsky performance status (KPS) scale. We investigated the association between KPS score and mortality in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We used the United Network for Organ Sharing database to perform a retrospective cohort study of patients listed for liver transplantation in the United States between 2005 and 2015. We used Cox proportional hazards and competing risk regression analyses to examine the association between KPS and mortality and transplantation.

RESULTS

Of 79,092 patients, 44% were in KPS category A (KPS, 80%-100%), 43% were in category B (KPS, 50%-70%), and 13% were in category C (KPS, 10%-40%). Between 2005 and 2015, the proportion of patients in category A decreased from 53% to 35%, whereas the proportions in categories B and C increased from 36% to 49% and from 11% to 16%, respectively. KPS was associated with mortality: compared with patients in KPS category A, the KPS B adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.18) and the KPS C adjusted HR was 1.63 (95% CI, 1.55-1.72). KPS was also associated with liver transplantation; compared with patients in KPS category A, the KPS B adjusted HR was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.06-1.11) and the KPS C adjusted HR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.30-1.40). In competing risk analysis, only the relationship between KPS and mortality maintained significance and directionality. These relationships were most pronounced in patients without hepatocellular carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation, poor performance status, based on the KPS scale, is associated with increased mortality. In this population, performance status has decreased over time.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure

Acute-on-chronic liver failure combines an acute deterioration in liver function in an individual with pre-existing chronic liver disease and hepatic and extrahepatic organ failures, and is associated with substantial short-term mortality. Common precipitants include bacterial and viral infections, alcoholic hepatitis, and surgery, but in more than 40% of patients, no precipitating event is identified. Systemic inflammation and susceptibility to infection are characteristic pathophysiological features. A new diagnostic score, the Chronic Liver Failure Consortium (CLIF-C) organ failure score, has been developed for classification and prognostic assessment of patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure. Disease can be reversed in many patients, and thus clinical management focuses upon the identification and treatment of the precipitant while providing multiorgan-supportive care that addresses the complex pattern of physiological disturbance in critically ill patients with liver disease. Liver transplantation is a highly effective intervention in some specific cases, but recipient identification, organ availability, timing of transplantation, and high resource use are barriers to more widespread application. Recognition of acute-on-chronic liver failure as a clinically and pathophysiologically distinct syndrome with defined diagnostic and prognostic criteria will help to encourage the development of new management pathways and interventions to address the unacceptably high mortality.

Cardiac imaging for the assessment of patients being evaluated for kidney or liver transplantation

Cardiac risk assessment prior to kidney and liver transplantation is controversial. Given the paucity of available organs, selecting appropriate recipients with favorable short- and long-term cardiovascular risk profile is crucial. Using noninvasive cardiac imaging tools to guide cardiovascular risk assessment and management can also be challenging and controversial. In this article, we address the burden of coronary artery disease among kidney and liver transplant candidates and review the literature pertaining to the diagnostic accuracy and the prognostic value of noninvasive cardiac imaging techniques in this population.

Linkage of a national clinical liver transplant database with administrative hospital data: methods and validation

INTRODUCTION

The UK Liver Transplant Audit (UKLTA) database contains clinical information on all liver transplants carried out in the UK. To expand its potential for research and service evaluation, we linked it to the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), an administrative database of all admissions to English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the UKLTA database, we identified the linkable records of first liver transplantation between April 1997 and March 2010. We linked UKLTA records to HES records on the basis of NHS number, gender, date of birth, and postcode, as well as procedure codes for liver transplantation and dates of transplant. In linked records, agreement of primary liver disease diagnoses according to both databases was expressed as a proportion of the linked records and using kappa statistic.

RESULTS

There were 5,815 linkable records in the UKLTA database, of which 4,959 records were successfully linked with HES (85.3%). Among these, 4,922 records (99.3%) had at least one diagnosis coded in HES relevant to an indication for liver transplantation. The overall agreement of primary liver disease diagnoses between UKLTA data and HES was 77.8% (95% CI 76.6%-79.0%) with a kappa of 0.75 (0.74-0.76). Diagnostic agreement can be further improved by using broader groupings of clinically related diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Linkage of clinical data and administrative hospital data provides a rich resource for the study of liver transplantation.

Outcomes among older adult liver transplantation recipients in the model of end stage liver disease (MELD) era

BACKGROUND

Since 2002, the Model of End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has been the basis of the liver transplant (LT) allocation system. Among older adult LT recipients, short-term outcomes in the MELD era were comparable to the pre-MELD era, but long-term outcomes remain unclear.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study using the UNOS data on patients age ≥ 50 years who underwent primary LT from February 27, 2002 until October 31, 2011.

RESULTS

A total of 35,686 recipients met inclusion criteria. The cohort was divided into 5-year interval age groups. Five-year over-all survival rates for ages 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, and 70+ were 72.2%, 71.6%, 69.5%, 65.0%, and 57.5%, respectively. Five-year graft survival rates after adjusting for death as competing risk for ages 50-54, 55-59,60-64, 65-69 and 70+ were 85.8%, 87.3%, 89.6%, 89.1% and 88.9%, respectively. By Cox proportional hazard modeling, age ≥ 60, increasing MELD, donor age ≥ 60, hepatitis C, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), dialysis and impaired pre-transplant functional status (FS) were associated with increased 5-year mortality. Using Fine and Gray sub-proportional hazard modeling adjusted for death as competing risk, 5-year graft failure was associated with donor age ≥ 60, increasing MELD, hepatitis C, HCC, and impaired pre-transplant FS.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older LT recipients in the MELD era, long-term graft survival after adjusting for death as competing risk was improved with increasing age, while over-all survival was worse. Donor age, hepatitis C, and pre-transplant FS represent potentially modifiable risk factors that could influence long-term graft and patient survival.

The impact of obesity as determined by modified body mass index on long-term outcome after liver transplantation: Canadian single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Obesity is thought to be associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality after liver transplantation (LT); however, its actual impact is difficult to evaluate, in part because of the confounding effects of fluid accumulation on body mass index (BMI).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to define the effects of conventional BMI (cBMI) and modified BMI (mBMI; calculated by multiplying the BMI by serum albumin level to compensate for fluid accumulation), on the outcome of LT recipients overall.

METHODS

A cohort of 507 patients who underwent LT from April 2000 to August 2006 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Pre-LT diabetes mellitus was seen somewhat more frequently in the higher mBMI group (P = .054), whereas there was no difference across cBMI categories. The recipients at extremes of cBMI (>40 kg/m(2) and <18.5 kg/m(2)) had significantly lower patient and graft survival than other groups (P = .038 and P = .010, respectively); however, no statistically significant differences were found in overall patient and graft survival across mBMI categories. There were no differences in duration of intensive care unit stay, duration of overall hospital stay, and vascular complications after LT among mBMI categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-LT obesity alone, when estimated by mBMI rather than by cBMI, should not be a contraindication for LT.

Report of depressive symptoms on waiting list and mortality after liver and kidney transplantation: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little research has explored pre-transplantation psychological factors as predictors of outcome after liver or kidney transplantation. Our objective is to determine whether report of depressive symptoms on waiting list predicts outcome of liver and kidney transplantation.

METHODS

Patients on waiting list for liver or kidney transplantation were classified for report or non-report of depressive symptoms on waiting list. 339 were transplanted 6 months later on average, and followed prospectively. The main outcome measures were graft failure and mortality 18 months post-transplantation.

RESULTS

Among the 339 patients, 51.6% reported depressive symptoms on waiting list, 16.5% had a graft failure and 7.4% died post-transplantation.Report of depressive symptoms on waiting list predicted a 3 to 4-fold decreased risk of graft failure and mortality 18-months post-transplantation, independently from age, gender, current cigarette smoking, anxiety symptoms, main primary diagnosis, UNOS score, number of comorbid diagnoses and history of transplantation. Data were consistent for liver and kidney transplantations. Other baseline predictive factors were: for graft failure, the main primary diagnosis and a shorter length since this diagnosis, and for mortality, older age, male gender and the main primary diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Further studies are needed to understand the underlying mechanisms of the association between report of depressive symptoms on waiting list and decreased risk of graft failure and mortality after transplantation.

Depressive symptoms predict long-term mortality after liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE

Depressive symptoms are common after liver transplantation (LT). We studied whether depressive symptoms affect long-term survival after LT.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, 134 liver transplant patients were assessed for depressive symptoms using the Beck Depression Inventory-short form (BDI), focusing on the 3 months post-LT score and on the score change from the waiting list period. They were followed up for long-term survival. The median duration of the follow-up period was 43 months post-LT. None of the 134 patients was lost to follow-up for survival.

RESULTS

A total of 33.6% of the LT patients had mild to moderate depressive symptoms 3 months post-LT. Eighteen (13.4%) patients died during the follow-up. Using Cox proportional hazards analysis, depressive symptoms were significantly associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.40, P<.003), one more point in the BDI score being associated with a 17% increase in mortality risk. Other predictive factors of mortality were older age and hepatitis C virus with recurrence 3 months post-LT. Similarly, an increase in depressive symptoms between the waiting list and 3 months post-LT periods predicted mortality (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01-1.38, P=.03), especially for patients without depressive symptoms on waiting list (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.16-2.12, P=.004).

CONCLUSION

Depressive symptoms after LT and an increase in depressive symptoms between the waiting list and post-LT are associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality. Interventions that could reduce depressive symptoms could potentially decrease long-term mortality after LT.

Recommendations for the assessment and reporting of multivariable logistic regression in transplantation literature

Multivariable logistic regression is an important method to evaluate risk factors and prognosis in solid organ transplant literature. We aimed to assess the quality of this method in six major transplantation journals. Eleven analytical criteria and four documentation criteria were analyzed for each selected article that used logistic regression. A total of 106 studies (6%) out of 1,701 original articles used logistic regression analyses from January 1, 2005 to January 1, 2006. The analytical criteria and their respective reporting percentage among the six journals were: Linearity (25%); Beta coefficient (48%); Interaction tests (19%); Main estimates (98%); Ovefitting prevention (84%); Goodness-of-fit (3.8%); Multicolinearity (4.7%); Internal validation (3.8%); External validation (8.5%). The documentation criteria were reported as follows: Selection of independent variables (73%); Coding of variables (9%); Fitting procedures (49%); Statistical program (65%). No significant differences were found among different journals or between general versus subspecialty journals with respect to reporting quality. We found that the report of logistic regression is unsatisfactory in transplantation journals. Because our findings may have major consequences for the care of transplant patients and for the design of transplant clinical trials, we recommend a practical solution for the use and reporting of logistic regression in transplantation journals.

Adult orthotopic liver transplantation in the United Kingdom and Ireland between 1994 and 2005

BACKGROUND

The UK and Ireland Liver Transplant Audit collects information on all liver transplantations that are carried out in both countries. In this paper, we describe these transplantations and their outcomes in adult patients according to primary liver disease diagnosis, type of transplantation and period.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 7906 orthotopic liver transplantations carried out between April 1994 and June 2005 in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate improvements in mortality according to period of transplantation adjusted for recipient and donor characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 6,850 transplantations were done in adults (patients 16 years or older). Of these, 836 (12.2%) were first super-urgent procedures (33.7% men; median age 36 years), and 5,072 (74.0%) first elective procedures (60.0% men; median age 52 years). The percentage of patients who received a donor organ with abnormal appearance gradually increased, especially in patients receiving an elective transplant. Mortality at 90 days after first super-urgent transplant decreased from 29.6% (95% confidence interval: 23.5% to 36.9%) before October 1, 1996 to 16.0% (11.7% to 21.7%) after October 1, 2002. Considering the same time periods, mortality at 90 days after first elective transplant decreased from 10.6% (8.9% to 12.7%) to 7.7% (6.3% to 9.3%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that these improvements cannot be explained by changes in the risk profile of recipients and donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing a liver transplantation in the most recent years had a better survival than patients with similar characteristics transplanted 10 years earlier. Posttransplant survival has improved despite a deteriorating quality of donor organs.

The impact of serum sodium concentration on mortality after liver transplantation: a cohort multicenter study

Modification of the current allocation system for donor livers in the United States to incorporate recipient serum sodium concentration ([Na]) has recently been proposed. However, the impact of this parameter on posttransplantation mortality has not been previously examined in a large risk-adjusted analysis. We assessed the effect of recipient [Na] on the survival of all adults with chronic liver disease who received a first single organ liver transplant in the UK and Ireland during the period March 1, 1994 to March 31, 2005 (n=5,152) at 3 years, during the first 90 days, and beyond the first 90 days, adjusting for a wide range of recipient, donor, and graft characteristics. Compared to those with normal [Na] (135-145 meq/L; n=3,066), severely hyponatremic recipients ([Na]<130 meq/L, n=541), had a higher risk-adjusted mortality at 3 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.59; P<0.02). The excess mortality was, however, confined to the first 90 days (HR 1.55; 95% CI, 1.18-2.04; P<0.002) with no significant difference thereafter. This was also true for hypernatremic recipients ([Na]>45 meq/L, n=81), who had an even greater risk-adjusted mortality compared to normonatremic recipients (overall: HR 1.85; 95% CI, 1.25-2.73; P<0.002; <or=90 days: HR 2.29; 95% CI, 1.42-3.70; P<0.001; >90 days: HR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.55-2.29; P=0.8), whereas mildly hyponatremic recipients ([Na] 130-134 meq/L, n=1,127) had similar risk-adjusted mortality to those with normal [Na] at the same time points. In conclusion, recipient [Na] is an independent predictor of death following liver transplantation. Attempts to correct the [Na] toward the normal reference range are an important aspect of pretransplantation management.

Developing a prognostic model for 90-day mortality after liver transplantation based on pretransplant recipient factors

BACKGROUND

Current statistical prognostic models for mortality after liver transplantation do not have good discriminatory ability. Furthermore, the methodology used to develop these models is often flawed. The objective of this paper is to develop a prognostic model for 90-day mortality after liver transplantation based on pretransplant recipient factors, employing a rigorous model development method.

METHODS

We used data on 4,829 patient that were prospectively collected for the UK & Ireland Liver Transplant Audit. Switching regression was employed to impute missing values combined with a bootstrapping approach for variable selection.

RESULTS

In all, 452 patients (9.4%) died within 90 days of their transplantation. The final prognostic model was well calibrated and discriminated moderately well between patients who did and who did not die (c-statistic 0.65, 95% CI [0.63, 0.68]). Although discrimination was not excellent overall, the results showed that those patients with a "low" chance of dying within 90 days of their transplant and those with a "high" chance of dying could be differentiated from patients with a "intermediate" chance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model can provide transplant candidates with predictions of their early posttransplantation prospects before any donor information is known, which is essential information for patients with end-stage liver disease for whom liver transplantation is a treatment option.