Improving National Results in Liver Transplantation Using Grafts From Donation After Cardiac Death Donors

Ferroptosis Inhibition: A Key Opportunity for the Treatment of Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury in Liver Transplantation

The outcome after liver transplantation has improved in recent years, which can be attributed to superior storage and transportation conditions of the organs, as well as better peri- and postoperative management and advancements in surgical techniques. Nevertheless, there is an increasing discrepancy between the need for organs and their availability. Consequently, the mortality rate on the waiting list is high and continues to rise. One way of counteracting this trend is to increase the use of "expanded criteria donors." This means that more and more donors will be included, especially those who are older and having additional comorbidities (eg, steatosis). A major complication of any transplantation is the occurrence of ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI), which often leads to liver dysfunction and failure. However, there have been various promising approaches to minimize IRI in recent years, but an effective and clinically applicable method to achieve a better outcome for patients after liver transplantation is still missing. Thereby, the so-called marginal organs are predominantly affected by IRI; thus, it is crucial to develop suitable and effective treatment options for patients. Recently, regulated cell death mechanisms, particularly ferroptosis, have been implicated to play a major role in IRI, including the liver. Therefore, inhibiting this kind of cell death modality presents a promising therapeutic approach for the management of this yet untreatable condition. Thus, this review provides an overview of the role of ferroptosis in liver IRI and transplantation and discusses possible therapeutic solutions based on ferroptosis inhibition to restrain IRI in marginal organs (especially steatosis and donation after circulatory death organs).

Outcomes of Liver Transplantation From Hepatitis C Virus-positive DCD Donors and Its Utilization Among Centers in the United States

BACKGROUND

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) or hepatitis C virus (HCV + ) liver grafts are underused among transplant centers in the United States. The study aimed to evaluate organ utilization and outcomes of liver grafts from DCD donors with HCV infection.

METHODS

National registry and local center data of all deceased donor liver transplants performed between November 2016 and December 2021 were analyzed. All transplants were divided into 4 groups: HCV - DCD, HCV - donation after brain death [DBD], HCV + DCD, and HCV + DBD. The outcome of interest was 1-y graft survival.

RESULTS

Out of 146 liver transplant centers in the United States, liver transplants were not performed from DCD donors, HCV + donors, and a combination of DCD and HCV + donors by 28.7%, 27%, and 70%-72% of centers, respectively. In multivariate analysis, increasing center acceptance ratio was associated with increased utilization of liver grafts from DCD HCV - and DCD HCV antibody-positive nucleic acid test negative donors. Nationally, 1-y graft survival of HCV - DCD liver grafts was lower compared with other groups (89% versus 92% HCV + DCD versus 93% HCV + DBD versus 92% HCV - DBD, log rank P  < 0.0001). There was no difference in 1-y graft survival among groups locally.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver grafts from HCV + DCD donors have 1-y patient and graft survival comparable with DBD liver grafts from donors with or without HCV infection. These results encourage the widespread use of liver grafts from DCD and HCV + donors and standardization of practice in DCD donation to expand the donor pool without compromising short-term outcomes.

Outcomes of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Liver Transplantation Utilizing Extended Criteria Donor Grafts

BACKGROUND

The deceased donor shortage in the United States has led to increased utilization extended criteria donor (ECD) liver grafts. Centers often utilize ECD grafts in patients with low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, like patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have directly examined the outcomes of using ECD grafts in patients with HCC.

METHODS

Adults receiving liver transplantation (LT) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 were identified in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Recipients were categorized according to donor type: standard criteria donor (SCD), extended criteria donor, donation after brain death (ECD-DBD), and donation after circulatory death (DCD). Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified variables associated with overall or graft survival at 3 years post-LT.

RESULTS

Most patients received ECD-DBD grafts (51.4%); only 8.3% received DCD grafts. The time on the waitlist was similar for ECD and SCD recipients (P = .79). SCD recipients had higher 5-year overall survival post-LT than ECD-DBD or DCD recipients (79.1%, 77.1%, and 76.8%, respectively, P < .001). Similarly, 5-year graft survival was also highest in SCD recipients (SCD = 77.8%, ECD-DBD = 75.7%, and DCD = 72.2%, P < .001). In multivariable analysis, DCD grafts increased mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12-1.57, P = .001), but ECD-DBD grafts did not (HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.00-1.22, P = .052).

CONCLUSIONS

DCD and ECD-DBD recipients had significantly lower overall and graft survival. However, the survival benefit of LT for patients with HCC greatly outweighs the small differences in patient and graft survival from using ECD grafts. Further research should investigate whether treatment of ECD grafts with machine perfusion may ameliorate this discrepancy.

Enhancing the usability of older DCD donors through strategic approaches in liver transplantation in the United States

The use of older donors after circulatory death (DCD) for liver transplantation (LT) has increased over the past decade. This study examined whether outcomes of LT using older DCD (≥50 y) have improved with advancements in surgical/perioperative care and normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) technology. A total of 7602 DCD LT cases from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2003-2022) were reviewed. The impact of older DCD donors on graft survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier and HR analyses. In all, 1447 LT cases (19.0%) involved older DCD donors. Although there was a decrease in their use from 2003 to 2014, a resurgence was noted after 2015 and reached 21.9% of all LTs in the last 4 years (2019-2022). Initially, 90-day and 1-year graft survivals for older DCDs were worse than younger DCDs, but this difference decreased over time and there was no statistical difference after 2015. Similarly, HRs for graft loss in older DCD have recently become insignificant. In older DCD LT, NMP usage has increased recently, especially in cases with extended donor-recipient distances, while the median time from asystole to aortic cross-clamp has decreased. Multivariable Cox regression analyses revealed that in the early phase, asystole to cross-clamp time had the highest HR for graft loss in older DCD LT without NMP, while in the later phases, the cold ischemic time (>5.5 h) was a significant predictor. LT outcomes using older DCD donors have become comparable to those from young DCD donors, with recent HRs for graft loss becoming insignificant. The strategic approach in the recent period could mitigate risks, including managing cold ischemic time (≤5.5 h), reducing asystole to cross-clamp time, and adopting NMP for longer distances. Optimal use of older DCD donors may alleviate the donor shortage.

Does Time to Asystole in Donors After Circulatory Death Impact Recipient Outcome in Liver Transplantation?

BACKGROUND

The agonal phase can vary following treatment withdrawal in donor after circulatory death (DCD). There is little evidence to support when procurement teams should stand down in relation to donor time to death (TTD). We assessed what impact TTD had on outcomes following DCD liver transplantation.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the UK Transplant Registry on DCD liver transplant recipients from 2006 to 2021. TTD was the time from withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment to asystole, and functional warm ischemia time was the time from donor systolic blood pressure and/or oxygen saturation falling below 50 mm Hg and 70%, respectively, to aortic perfusion. The primary endpoint was 1-y graft survival. Potential predictors were fitted into Cox proportional hazards models. Adjusted restricted cubic spline models were generated to further delineate the relationship between TTD and outcome.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred fifty-eight recipients of a DCD liver graft were included. Median TTD in the entire cohort was 13 min (interquartile range, 9-17 min). Restricted cubic splines revealed that the risk of graft loss was significantly greater when TTD ≤14 min. After 14 min, there was no impact on graft loss. Prolonged hepatectomy time was significantly associated with graft loss (hazard ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.83; P  = 0.003); however, functional warm ischemia time had no impact (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-2.27; P  > 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

A very short TTD was associated with increased risk of graft loss, possibly because of such donors being more unstable and/or experiencing brain stem death as well as circulatory death. Expanding the stand down times may increase the utilization of donor livers without significantly impairing graft outcome.

The Association Between the Origin of the Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Recovery Team and Graft Survival: A National Study

Background

Transplant centers have traditionally relied upon procurement teams from their own programs (transplant program procurement team [TPT]) to recover donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers and rarely use surgical procurement teams not affiliated with the recipient center (nontransplant program procurement team [NTPT]). However, in the era of wider geographic organ sharing, greater reliance on NTPTs is often necessary.

Methods

We used national data to study the association between the origin of the donor procurement team (NTPT versus TPT) and the risk of DCD liver allograft failure.

Results

Five hundred NTPT and 2257 TPT DCD transplants were identified: 1-y graft survival was 88.9 and 88.6%, respectively (P = 0.962). In a multivariable model, the origin of the procurement team was not associated with graft failure NTPT versus TPT (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.22; P = 0.57) but rather with known risks for DCD graft loss including donor age, degree of recipient illness, cold ischemic time, and retransplantation. The overall incidence of retransplantation and ischemic cholangiopathy as an indication for retransplantation were similar between NTPT and TPT.

Conclusions

This data suggests that transplant centers may be able to safely use DCD livers recovered by local surgical teams.

Toward standardized brain tumor tissue processing protocols in neuro-oncology: a perspective for gliomas and beyond

Implementation of standardized protocols in neurooncology during the surgical resection of brain tumors is needed to advance the clinical treatment paradigms that use tissue for diagnosis, prognosis, bio-banking, and treatment. Currently recommendations on intraoperative tissue procurement only exist for diffuse gliomas but management of other brain tumor subtypes can also benefit from these protocols. Fresh tissue from surgical resection can now be used for intraoperative diagnostics and functional precision medicine assays. A multidisciplinary neuro-oncology perspective is critical to develop the best avenues for practical standardization. This perspective from the multidisciplinary Oncology Tissue Advisory Board (OTAB) discusses current advances, future directions, and the imperative of adopting standardized protocols for diverse brain tumor entities. There is a growing need for consistent operating room practices to enhance patient care, streamline research efforts, and optimize outcomes.

Improved Waitlist Outcomes in Liver Transplant Patients With Mid-MELD-Na Scores Listed in Centers Receptive to Use of Organs Donated After Circulatory Death

BACKGROUND

Liver transplant (LT) using organs donated after circulatory death (DCD) has been increasing in the United States. We investigated whether transplant centers' receptiveness to use of DCD organs impacted patient outcomes.

METHODS

Transplant centers were classified as very receptive (group 1), receptive (2), or less receptive (3) based on the DCD acceptance rate and DCD transplant percentage. Using organ procurement and transplantation network/UNOS registry data for 20 435 patients listed for LT from January 2020 to June 2022, we compared rates of 1-y transplant probability and waitlist mortality between groups, broken down by model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) categories.

RESULTS

In adjusted analyses, patients in group 1 centers with MELD-Na scores 6 to 29 were significantly more likely to undergo transplant than those in group 3 (aHR range 1.51-2.11, P  < 0.001). Results were similar in comparisons between groups 1 and 2 (aHR range 1.41-1.81, P  < 0.001) and between groups 2 and 3 with MELD-Na 15-24 (aHR 1.19-1.20, P  < 0.007). Likewise, patients with MELD-Na score 20 to 29 in group 1 centers had lower waitlist mortality than those in group 3 (scores, 20-24: aHR, 0.71, P  = 0.03; score, 25-29: aHR, 0.51, P  < 0.001); those in group 1 also had lower waitlist mortality compared with group 2 (scores 20-24: aHR0.69, P  = 0.02; scores 25-29: aHR 0.63, P  = 0.03). One-year posttransplant survival of DCD LT patients did not vary significantly compared with donation after brain dead.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that transplant centers' use of DCD livers can improve waitlist outcomes, particularly among mid-MELD-Na patients.

Normothermic Machine Perfusion Is Associated With Improvement in Mortality and Graft Failure in Donation After Cardiac Death Liver Transplant Recipients in the United States

Background

Use of normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) may help to expand the liver transplantation (LT) donor pool by potentially increasing the utilization of donation after circulatory death (DCD) organs. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of NMP on LT from DCD organs.

Methods

Data among DCD adult LT recipients in the United Network for Organ Sharing between January 2016 and December 2022 were analyzed. Outcomes were compared between 2 groups: NMP versus non-MP using propensity score matching.

Results

During the study period, 4217 DCD LT recipients (NMP: 257 and non-MP: 3960) were identified. compared with non-MP, DCD LT recipients in NMP group were older (median recipient age: 61 versus 59 y, P = 0.013), had lower model for the end-stage liver disease score, longer wait time (126 versus 107 d, P = 0.028), and received organs from older donors (median age: 42 versus 38 y, P < 0.01) with longer preservation time (9.9 versus 5.3 h, P < 0.001). Two-year overall survival (NMP 94.4% versus non-MP 89.7%, P = 0.040) and 2-y graft survival (NMP 91.3% versus non-MP 84.6%, P = 0.017) were better in the NMP group. After propensity score matching, 2-y overall survival (NMP 94.2% versus non-MP 88.0%, P = 0.023) and graft survival (NMP 91.3% versus non-MP 81.6%, P = 0.004) were better in the NMP group. On multivariable cox regression analysis, NMP was an independent factor of protection against mortality (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.91; P = 0.029) and against graft failure (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.61; P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Use of NMP for LT from DCD donors was associated with improved posttransplant patient and graft survival.

Should advanced perfusion be the standard of care for donation after circulatory death liver transplant?

As an alternative to static cold storage (SCS), advanced perfusion techniques such as normothermic regional perfusion and ex-situ perfusion (normothermic or hypothermic) have emerged as a way to improve the ischemic injury suffered by donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers. Multiple studies have been published that have demonstrated superior post-DCD liver transplant outcomes when using advanced perfusion compared with SCS. In particular, these studies have shown lower rates of ischemic cholangiopathy with advanced perfusion. In addition to the improved post-liver transplant outcomes, studies have also demonstrated higher rates of liver utilization from DCD donors when advanced perfusion is used compared with SCS. Given the high rates of graft loss in patients who develop ischemic cholangiopathy, the significant reduction seen in DCD donor livers that have undergone advanced perfusion represents a key step in more broad utilization of these livers. With such compelling evidence from multiple trials, it seems reasonable to ask the question: should advanced perfusion be the standard of care for DCD liver transplant?

Variation in DCD Liver Transplant Protocols Among Transplant Centers in the United States

Background

Variation in donation after circulatory death (DCD) organ recovery and liver transplant practices exist among transplant centers. This study aimed to evaluate these practices among centers in the United States.

Methods

Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data were accessed to identify centers that performed liver transplantation in 2021 and 2022. Surveys were sent to transplant centers that consistently performed ≥5 DCD liver transplants per year.

Results

DCD liver transplants were performed by 95 centers (65.1%) of the 146 liver transplant centers in the United States. Survey results were recorded from 42 centers that consistently performed ≥5 DCD liver transplants per year, with a 59.5% response rate. Withdrawal-to-asystole and agonal time were used to define donor warm ischemia time (WIT) in 16% and 84% centers, respectively. Fifty-six percent of the centers did not use oxygen saturation to define donor WIT. Systolic blood pressure cutoffs used to define agonal time varied between 50 and 80 mm Hg, donor age cutoffs ranged between 55 and 75 y, and cold ischemia times varied between 4 and 10 h. Seventy-six percent of centers used normothermic machine perfusion for DCD liver transplantation.

Conclusions

This study highlights the wide variation in use, recovery, and definition of donor WIT. Using national data to rigorously define best practices will encourage greater utilization of this important donor resource.

Approach to Liver Transplantation: Is There a Difference between East and West?

Liver transplantation (LT) remains the only curative treatment for end-stage liver disease as well as acute liver failure. With the exponential increase in organ demand due to the increasing incidence and prevalence of liver diseases, the need to overcome the supply and demand mismatch has arisen. In this review, we discuss the current universal status of LT, emphasizing various LT practices worldwide.

Strategies to Improve the Utilization and Function of DCD Livers

Despite the increased usage of livers from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors in the last decade, many patients remaining on the waitlist who need a liver transplant. Recent efforts have focused on maximizing the utilization and outcomes of these allografts using advances in machine perfusion technology and other perioperative strategies such as normothermic regional perfusion (NRP). In addition to the standard donor and recipient matching that is required with DCD donation, new data regarding the impact of graft steatosis, extensive European experience with NRP, and the increasing use of normothermic and hypothermic machine perfusion have shown immense potential in increasing DCD organ overall utilization and improved outcomes. These techniques, along with viability testing of extended criteria donors, have generated early promising data to consider the use of higher-risk donor organs and more widespread adoption of these techniques in the United States. This review explores the most recent international literature regarding strategies to optimize the utilization and outcomes of DCD liver allografts, including donor-recipient matching, perioperative strategies including NRP versus rapid controlled DCD recovery, viability assessment of discarded livers, and postoperative strategies including machine perfusion versus pharmacologic interventions.

Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation: Early Challenges, Clinical Improvement, and Future Directions

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver allografts remain a widely underutilized source of donor organs for transplantation. Although initially linked with inferior outcomes, DCD liver transplant can achieve excellent patient and graft survival with suitable matching of donor and recipient characteristics, rapid donor recovery and precise donor assessment, and appropriate perioperative management. The advent of clinical liver perfusion modalities promises to redefine the viability parameters for DCD liver allografts and hopefully will encourage more widespread usage of this growing source of donor livers.

Surgical Versus Image-Guided Interventions in the Management of Complications After Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation is a technically demanding surgical procedure with known complications, and the optimal approach to addressing vascular and biliary complications requires a coordinated effort between surgical and interventional radiology teams. Vascular complications involving the hepatic artery, portal vein, or hepatic veins can be characterized by their mechanism, chronicity, and timing of presentation. These factors help determine whether the optimal therapeutic approach is surgical or endovascular. Very early presentation in the perioperative period favors surgical revision, while later presentation is best addressed endovascularly. Biliary complications can be categorized as leaks or strictures, and coordinated surgical, endoscopic, and percutaneous management is needed to address these types of complications. Through advances in technique and the management of complications, outcomes after liver transplantation continue to improve.

Older liver grafts from donation after circulatory death are associated with impaired survival and higher incidence of biliary non-anastomotic stricture

BACKGROUND

Grafts from older donors after circulatory death were associated with inferior outcome in liver transplants in the past. But it has seemed to remain controversial in the last decade, as a result of modified clinical protocols, selected recipients, and advanced technology of organ perfusion and preservation. The present study aimed to examine the impact of older donor age on complications and survival of liver transplant using grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD).

METHODS

A total of 944 patients who received DCD liver transplantation from 2015 to 2020 were included and divided into two groups: using graft from older donor (aged ≥ 65 years, n = 87) and younger donor (age < 65 years, n = 857). Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to eliminate selection bias.

RESULTS

A progressively increased proportion of liver transplants with grafts from older donors was observed from 1.68% to 15.44% during the study period. The well-balanced older donor (n = 79) and younger donor (n = 79) were 1:1 matched. There were significantly more episodes of biliary non-anastomotic stricture (NAS) in the older donor group than the younger donor group [15/79 (19.0%) vs. 6/79 (7.6%); P = 0.017]. The difference did not reach statistical significance regarding early allograft dysfunction (EAD) and primary non-function (PNF). Older livers had a trend toward inferior 1-, 2-, 3-year graft and overall survival compared with younger livers, but these differences were not statistically significant (63.1%, 57.6%, 57.6% vs. 76.9%, 70.2%, 67.7%, P = 0.112; 64.4%, 58.6%, 58.6% vs. 76.9%, 72.2%, 72.2%, P = 0.064). The only risk factor for poor survival was ABO incompatible transplant (P = 0.008) in the older donor group. In the subgroup of ABO incompatible cases, it demonstrated a significant difference in the rate of NAS between the older donor group and the younger donor group [6/8 (75.0%) vs. 3/14 (21.4%); P = 0.014].

CONCLUSIONS

Transplants with grafts from older donors (aged ≥ 65 years) after circulatory death are more frequently associated with inferior outcome compared to those from younger donors. Older grafts from DCD are more likely to develop NAS, especially in ABO incompatible cases.

Oxygen saturation during donor warm ischemia time and outcome of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation with static cold storage: A review of 1114 cases

The donor operation and the hemodynamics during declaration resulting in donor warm ischemia time have been linked to the outcomes in donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT). Scrutiny of the donor hemodynamics at the time of withdrawal of life support concluded that a functional donor warm ischemia time may be associated with LT graft failure. Unfortunately, the definition for functional donor warm ischemia time has not reached a consensus-but has almost always incorporated time spent in a hypoxic state. Herein, we reviewed 1114 DCD LT cases performed at the 20 highest volume centers during 2014 and 2018. Donor hypoxia began within 3 minutes of withdrawal of life support for 60% of cases and within 10 minutes for 95% of cases. Graft survival was 88.3% at 1 year and 80.3% at 3 years. Scrutinizing the time spent under hypoxic conditions (oxygen saturation ≤ 80%) during the withdrawal of life support, we found an increasing risk of graft failure as hypoxic time increased from 0 to 16 minutes. After 16 minutes and up to 50 minutes, we did not find any increased risk of graft failure. In conclusion, after 16 minutes of time in hypoxia, the risk of graft failure in DCD LT did not increase. The current evidence suggests that an over-reliance on hypoxia time may lead to an unnecessary increase in DCD liver discard and may not be as useful for predicting graft loss after LT.

Waitlist and Transplant Outcomes in Organ Donation After Circulatory Death: Trends in the United States

OBJECTIVES

To summarize waitlist and transplant outcomes in kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplantation using organ donation after circulatory death (DCD).

BACKGROUND

DCD has expanded the donor pool for solid organ transplantation, most recently for heart transplantation.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was used to identify adult transplant candidates and recipients in the most recent allocation policy eras for kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplantation. Transplant candidates and recipients were grouped by acceptance criteria for DCD versus brain-dead donors [donation after brain death (DBD)] only and DCD versus DBD transplant, respectively. Propensity matching and competing-risks regression was used to model waitlist outcomes. Survival was modeled using propensity matching and Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

DCD transplant volumes have increased significantly across all organs. Liver candidates listed for DCD organs were more likely to undergo transplantation compared with propensity-matched candidates listed for DBD only, and heart and liver transplant candidates listed for DCD were less likely to experience death or clinical deterioration requiring waitlist inactivation. Propensity-matched DCD recipients demonstrated an increased mortality risk up to 5 years after liver and kidney transplantation and up to 3 years after lung transplantation compared with DBD. There was no difference in 1-year mortality between DCD and DBD heart transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

DCD continues to expand access to transplantation and improves waitlist outcomes for liver and heart transplant candidates. Despite an increased risk for mortality with DCD kidney, liver, and lung transplantation, survival with DCD transplant remains acceptable.

Can ex-situ normothermic perfusion improve graft survival compared to static cold storage among donation after circulatory death liver allografts?

Limited data suggest that ex-situ normothermic liver perfusion (ENLP) may improve the outcomes of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplants compared to static cold storage (SCS). All adult DCD liver transplants performed between 2016 and 2021 were identified in the United Network of Organ Sharing database. ENLP liver transplants were compared to SCS using inverse probability of treatment weighting to balance clinical and demographic confounders. The primary analysis simulated intention-to-treat with inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted Cox models. Compared to SCS DCDs (N = 3,079), recipients of ENLP DCDs (N = 65) had lower Model of End Stage Liver Disease scores at transplant (16.5 v. 18.8, p = 0.033), longer wait times (468 ± 720 vs. 246 ± 467 d; p < 0.001), and received livers from donors with a greater BMI (29.2 vs. 27.5; p = 0.008). ENLP preservation was associated with a lower risk of graft failure (HR 0.31 vs. SCS, 95% CI:0.12-0.86, p = 0.023) and a lower incidence of retransplantation. A sub-analysis restricted to the 20 centers performing ENLP, encompassing 946 SCS DCDs, demonstrated similar results: (HR 0.33 vs. SCS, 95% CI: 0.13-0.94, p = 0.021). Among 111 patients who required retransplantation and where the etiology of graft failure was identified, graft failure due to ischemic cholangiopathy was noted in 1 ENLP and 46 SCS. In this retrospective analysis of the early US DCD ENLP experience, there may exist a graft survival benefit to transplants performed with ENLP compared to SCS.

Expanding Liver Transplant Opportunities in Older Patients With Nonconventional Grafts

INTRODUCTION

Broader use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and nonconventional grafts for liver transplant helps reduce disparities in organ availability. Limited data, however, exists on outcomes specific to nonconventional graft utilization in older patients. As such, this study aimed to investigate outcomes specific to conventional and nonconventional graft utilization in recipients > 70 y of age.

METHODS

1-to-3 matching based on recipient sex, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and donor type was performed on patients ≥70 and <70 y of age who underwent liver transplant alone at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2015 and 2020. Primary outcomes were posttransplant patient and liver allograft survival for recipients greater than or less than 70 y of age. Secondary outcomes included grafts utilization patterns, hospital length of stay, need for reoperation, biliary complications and disposition at time of hospital discharge.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 36.1% of grafts came from DCD donors, 17.4% were postcross clamp offers, and 20.8% were nationally allocated. Median recipient ages were 59 and 71 y (P < 0.01). Recipients had similar Intensive care unit (P = 0.82) and hospital (P = 0.14) lengths of stay, and there were no differences in patient (P = 0.68) or graft (P = 0.38) survival. When comparing donation after brain death and DCD grafts in those >70 y, there were no differences in patient (P = 0.89) or graft (P = 0.71) survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Excellent outcomes can be achieved in older recipients, even with use of nonconventional grafts. Expanded use of nonconventional grafts can help facilitate transplant opportunities in older patients.

Comparative Analysis of Donor Liver Allograft Outcomes in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Who Underwent Liver Transplant

OBJECTIVES

Liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma involves 3 main types of donor allografts: donation after brain death, donation after cardiac death, and donation after brain and cardiac death. Data on this topic are limited, and controversies exist regarding liver transplant outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma patients who have received these allografts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 490 hepatocellular carcinoma patients who received liver transplant from 2015 to 2021 at the Shulan (Hangzhou) Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Participants were divided into 3 cohorts according to allograft type: donation after brain death, donation after cardiac death, and donation after brain and cardiac death. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods were used to evaluate patient survival, graft survival, and recurrence-free survival rates after liver transplant.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that 3-year patient survival rates were 69.2% for donations after brain death, 69.2% for donations after cardiac death, and 46.6% for donations after brain and cardiac death (P = .42); the 3-year graft survival rates were 53.3% for donations after brain death, 56.4% for donations after cardiac death, and 46.6% for donations after brain and cardiac death (P = .44); and 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were 55% for donations after brain death, 56.6% for donations after cardiac death, and 39.5% for donations after brain and cardiac death (P = .46). Complications were also similar across the 3 cohorts (P = .36). Multivariable analysis showed that intraoperative red blood cell transfusion (hazard ratio: 1.820; P = .042) and early allograft dysfunction (hazard ratio: 3.240; P = .041) were independent risk factors for graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar outcomes can be achieved for hepatocellular carcinoma patients who undergo liver transplant with donations after brain death, donations after cardiac death, or donations after brain and cardiac death allografts, especially when strict donor selection criteria are applied.

The evolution of the liver transplant candidate

The first successful human liver transplant (LT) was done over 60 years ago; since the early pioneering days, this procedure has become a routine treatment with excellent outcomes for the great majority of recipients. Over the last six decades, indications have evolved. Use of LT for hepatic malignancy is becoming less common as factors that define a successful outcome are being increasingly defined, and alternative therapeutic options become available. Both Hepatitis B and C virus associated liver disease are becoming less common indications as medical treatments become more effective in preventing end-stage disease. Currently, the most common indications are alcohol-related liver disease and metabolic associated liver disease. The developing (and controversial) indications include acute on chronic liver failure, alcoholic hepatitis and some rarer malignancies such as non-resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases, neuroendocrine tumours and cholangiocarcinoma. Candidates are becoming older and with greater comorbidities, A relative shortage of donor organs remains the greatest cause for reducing access to LT; therefore, various countries have developed transparent approaches to allocation of this life saving and life enhancing resource. Reliance on prognostic models has gone some way to improve transparency and increase equity of access but these approaches have their limitations.

Donation after circulatory death: Novel strategies to improve the liver transplant outcome

In many countries, donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver grafts are used to overcome organ shortages; however, DCD grafts have been associated with an increased risk of complications and even graft loss after liver transplantation. The increased risk of complications is thought to correlate with prolonged functional donor warm ischaemia time. Stringent donor selection criteria and utilisation of in situ and ex situ organ perfusion technologies have led to improved outcomes. Additionally, the increased use of novel organ perfusion strategies has led to the possibility of reconditioning marginal DCD liver grafts. Moreover, these technologies enable the assessment of liver function before implantation, thus providing valuable data that can guide more precise graft-recipient selection. In this review, we first describe the different definitions of functional warm donor ischaemia time and its role as a determinant of outcomes after DCD liver transplantation, with a focus on the thresholds proposed for graft acceptance. Next, organ perfusion strategies, namely normothermic regional perfusion, hypothermic oxygenated perfusion, and normothermic machine perfusion are discussed. For each technique, clinical studies reporting on the transplant outcome are described, together with a discussion on the possible protective mechanisms involved and the functional criteria adopted for graft selection. Finally, we review multimodal preservation protocols involving a combination of more than one perfusion technique and potential future directions in the field.

Application of cholecystic duct plasty in the prevention of biliary complications following orthotopic liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The purpose was aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of cholecystic duct plasty (CDP) and biliary reconstruction techniques preventing biliary complications following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) first proposed by our center.

METHODS

127 enrolled patients who underwent LT in our center from January 2015 to December 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the mode of biliary tract reconstruction, patients were divided into CDP group (Group 1, n = 53) and control group (Group 2, n = 74). The differences of perioperative general data, biliary complications and long-term prognosis between two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

All patients completed the operation successfully, the incidence of perioperative complications was 22.8%. There was no significant difference in perioperative general data and complications between the two groups. Follow-up ended in June 2020, with a median follow-up period of 31 months. During the follow-up period, biliary complications occurred in 26 patients, with an overall incidence of 20.5%. The overall incidence of biliary complications and anastomotic stenosis in Group 1 was lower than that in Group 2 (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in overall prognosis between the two groups (P = 0.274), however, the cumulative incidence of biliary complications in Group 1 was lower than that in Group 2 (P = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

Reconstruction of common bile duct by CDP represents considerable safety and practicability, particularly for patients with small diameter of common bile duct or wide discrepancy of bile duct size between donor and recipient.

Outcomes after liver transplantation using deceased after circulatory death donors: A comparison of outcomes in the UK and the US

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Identifying international differences in utilization and outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) after donation after circulatory death (DCD) donation provides a unique opportunity for benchmarking and population-level insight.

METHODS

Adult (≥18 years) LT data between 2008 and 2018 from the UK and US were used to assess mortality and graft failure after DCD LT. We used time-dependent Cox-regression methods to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for risk-adjusted short-term (0-90 days) and longer-term (90 days-5 years) outcomes.

RESULTS

One-thousand five-hundred-and-sixty LT receipts from the UK and 3426 from the US were included. Over the study period, the use of DCD livers increased from 15.7% to 23.9% in the UK compared to 5.1% to 7.6% in the US. In the UK, DCD donors were older (UK:51 vs. US:33 years) with longer cold ischaemia time (UK: 437 vs. US: 333 min). Recipients in the US had higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, higher body mass index, higher proportions of ascites, encephalopathy, diabetes and previous abdominal surgeries. No difference in the risk-adjusted short-term mortality or graft failure was observed between the countries. In the longer-term (90 days-5 years), the UK had lower mortality and graft failure (adj.mortality HR:UK: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.49-0.80); graft failure HR: UK: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.91). The cumulative incidence of retransplantation was higher in the UK (5 years: UK: 11.9% vs. 4.6%; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

For those receiving a DCD LT, longer-term post-transplant outcomes in the UK are superior to the US, however, significant differences in recipient illness, graft quality and access to retransplantation were seen between the two countries.

American Society of Transplant Surgeons recommendations on best practices in donation after circulatory death organ procurement

The American Society of Transplant Surgeons supports efforts to increase the number of organs that are critically needed for patients desperately awaiting transplantation. In the United States, transplantation using organs procured from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors has continued to increase in number. Despite these increases, substantial variability in the utilization and practices of DCD transplantation still exists. To improve DCD organ utilization, it is important to create a set of best practices for DCD recovery. The following recommendations aim to provide guidance on contemporary issues surrounding DCD organ procurement in the United States. A work group was composed of members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeon Scientific Studies Committee and the Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. The following topics were identified by the group either as controversial or lacking standardization: prewithdrawal preparation, definition of donor warm ischemia time, DCD surgical technique, combined thoracic and abdominal procurements, and normothermic regional perfusion. The proposed recommendations were classified on the basis of the grade of available evidence and the strength of the recommendation. This information should be valuable for transplant programs as well as for organ procurement organizations and donor hospitals as they develop robust DCD donor procurement protocols.

First case report of multivisceral transplant from a deceased cardiac death donor

The current shortage of pediatric multivisceral donors accounts for the long time and mortality on the waiting list of pediatric patients. The use of donors after cardiac death, especially after the outbreak of normothermic regional perfusion, has increased in recent years for all solid organs except the intestine, mainly because of its higher susceptibility to ischemia-reperfusion injury. We present the first literature case of multivisceral donors after cardiac death transplantation in a 13-month-old recipient from a 2.5-month-old donor. Once exitus was certified, an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit was established, cannulating the aorta and infrarenal vena cava, while the supra-aortic branches were clamped. The abdominal organs completely recovered from ischemia through normothermic regional perfusion (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initially and beating heart later). After perfusion with the preservation solution, the multivisceral graft was uneventfully implanted. Two months later, the patient was discharged without any complications. This case demonstrates the possibility of reducing the time spent on the waiting list for these patients.

Comparison of Biliary Complications Rates After Brain Death, Donation After Circulatory Death, and Living-Donor Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Cohort Study

Donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD), donation-after-brain-death (DBD), and living-donation (LD) are the three possible options for liver transplantation (LT), each with unique benefits and complication rates. We aimed to compare DCD-, DBD-, and LD-LT-specific graft survival and biliary complications (BC). We collected data on 138 DCD-, 3,027 DBD- and 318 LD-LTs adult recipients from a single center and analyzed patient/graft survival. BC (leak and anastomotic/non-anastomotic stricture (AS/NAS)) were analyzed in a subset of 414 patients. One-/five-year graft survival were 88.6%/70.0% for DCD-LT, 92.6%/79.9% for DBD-LT, and, 91.7%/82.9% for LD-LT. DCD-LTs had a 1.7-/1.3-fold adjusted risk of losing their graft compared to DBD-LT and LD-LT, respectively (p < 0.010/0.403). Bile leaks were present in 10.1% (DCD-LTs), 7.2% (DBD-LTs), and 36.2% (LD-LTs) (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.7/4.2, p = 0.402/<0.001). AS developed in 28.3% DCD-LTs, 18.1% DBD-LTs, and 43.5% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.5/1.8, p = 0.018/0.006). NAS was present in 15.2% DCD-LTs, 1.4% DBDs-LT, and 4.3% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.1/0.3, p = 0.001/0.005). LTs w/o BC had better liver graft survival compared to any other groups with BC. DCD-LT and LD-LT had excellent graft survival despite significantly higher BC rates compared to DBD-LT. DCD-LT represents a valid alternative whose importance should increase further with machine/perfusion systems.

Donation after circulatory death transplant outcomes using livers recovered by local surgeons

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) outcomes have been attributed to multiple variables, including procurement surgeon recovery techniques. Outcomes of 196 DCD LTs at Mayo Clinic Arizona were analyzed based on graft recovery by a surgeon from our center (transplant procurement team [TPT]) versus a local procurement surgeon (non-TPT [NTPT]). A standard recovery technique was used for all TPT livers. The recovery technique used by the NTPT was left to the discretion of that surgeon. A total of 129 (65.8%) grafts were recovered by our TPT, 67 (34.2%) by the NTPT. Recipient age (p = 0.43), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (median 17 vs. 18; p = 0.22), and donor warm ischemia time (median 21.0 vs. 21.5; p = 0.86) were similar between the TPT and NTPT groups. NTPT livers had longer cold ischemia times (6.5 vs. 5.0 median hours; p < 0.001). Early allograft dysfunction (80.6% vs. 76.1%; p = 0.42) and primary nonfunction (0.8% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.47) were similar. Ischemic cholangiopathy (IC) treated with endoscopy occurred in 18.6% and 11.9% of TPT and NTPT grafts (p = 0.23). At last follow-up, approximately half of those requiring endoscopy were undergoing a stent-free trial (58.3% TPT; 50.0% NTPT; p = 0.68). IC requiring re-LT in the first year occurred in 0.8% (n = 1) of TPT and 3.0% (n = 2) of NTPT grafts (p = 0.23). There were no differences in patient (hazard ratio [HR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-5.03; p = 0.23) or graft (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 0.98-4.09; p = 0.10) survival rates. Graft survival at 1 year was 91.5% for TPT grafts and 95.5% for NTPT grafts. Excellent outcomes can be achieved using NTPT for the recovery of DCD livers. There may be an opportunity to expand the use of DCD livers in the United States by increasing the use of NTPT.

DCD Liver Grafts Can Safely Be Used for Recipients With Grade I–II Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Multicenter Analysis

With donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT), the goal of the recipient implantation procedure is to minimize surgical complexity to avoid a tenuous environment for an already marginal graft. The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) at the time of LT adds surgical complexity, yet‚ to date, no studies have investigated the utilization of DCD liver grafts for patients with PVT.

Impact of the donor hepatectomy time on short-term outcomes in liver transplantation using donation after circulatory death: A review of the US national registry

BACKGROUND

During the donor hepatectomy time (dHT), defined as the time from the start of cold perfusion to the end of the hepatectomy, liver grafts have a suboptimal temperature. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of prolonged dHT on outcomes in donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

Using the US national registry data between 2012 and 2020, DCD LT patients were separated into 2 groups based on their dHT: standard dHT (<42 min) and prolonged dHT (≥42 min).

RESULTS

There were 3810 DCD LTs during the study period. Median dHT was 32 min (IQR 25-41 min). Kaplan- Meier graft survival curves demonstrated inferior outcomes in the prolonged dHT group at 1-year after DCD LT compared to those in the standard dHT group (85.3% vs 89.9%; p < 0.01). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models for 1-year graft survival identified that prolonged dHT [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 - 1.79], recipient age ≥ 64 years (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14 - 1.72), and MELD score ≥ 24 (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.16 - 1.76) were significant predictors of 1-year graft loss. Spline analysis shows that the dHT effects on the risk for 1-year graft loss with an increase in the slope after median dHT of 32 min.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged dHTs significantly reduced graft and patient survival after DCD LT. Because dHT is a modifiable factor, donor surgeons should take on cases with caution by setting the dHT target of < 32 min. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Lung transplantation from controlled donation after circulatory death using simultaneous abdominal normothermic regional perfusion: A single center experience

Despite the benefits of abdominal normothermic regional perfusion (A-NRP) for abdominal grafts in controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD), there is limited information on the effect of A-NRP on the quality of the cDCD lungs. We aimed to study the effect of A-NRP in lungs obtained from cDCD and its impact on recipients´ outcomes. This is a study comparing outcomes of lung transplants (LT) from cDCD donors (September 2014 to December 2021) obtained using A-NRP as the abdominal preservation method. As controls, all lung recipients transplanted from donors after brain death (DBD) were considered. The primary outcomes were lung recipient 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year survival. A total of 269 LT were performed (60 cDCD and 209 DBD). There was no difference in survival at 3 months (98.3% cDCD vs. 93.7% DBD), 1 year (90.9% vs. 87.2%), and 5 years (68.7% vs. 69%). LT from the cDCD group had a higher rate of primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 h (10% vs. 3.4%; p <  .001). This is the largest experience ever reported with the use of A-NRP combined with lung retrieval in cDCD donors. This combined method is safe for lung grafts presenting short-term survival outcomes equivalent to those transplanted through DBD.

Decreasing Significance of Early Allograft Dysfunction with Rising Use of Nonconventional Donors

Background and Objectives: Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) is considered a surrogate marker for adverse post-liver transplant (LT) outcomes. With the increasing use of nonconventional donors, EAD has become a more frequent occurrence. Given this background, we aimed to assess the prevalence and impact of EAD in an updated cohort inclusive of both conventional and nonconventional liver allografts. Materials and Methods: Perioperative and one-year outcomes were assessed for a total of 611 LT recipients with and without EAD from Mayo Clinic Arizona. EAD was defined as the presence of one or more of the following: bilirubin > 10 mg/dL on day 7, INR > 1.6 on day 7, or ALT and/or AST > 2000 IU/L within the first 7 days of LT. Results: Within this cohort, 31.8% of grafts (n = 194) came from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors, 17.7% (n = 108) were nationally shared, 16.4% (n = 100) were allocated as post-cross clamp, and 8.7% contained moderate steatosis. EAD was observed in 52.2% (n = 321) of grafts in the study cohort (79% in DCD grafts and 40% in DBD grafts). EAD grafts had higher donor risk index (DRI) scores (1.9 vs. 1.6, p < 0.0001), were more likely to come from DCD donors (48% vs. 13.8%, p < 0.0001), were regionally allocated (p = 0.003), and had higher cold ischemia times (median 6.0 vs. 5.5 h, p = 0.001). Primary nonfunction events were rare in both groups (1.3% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.22). Post-LT acute kidney injury occurred at a similar frequency in recipients with and without EAD (43.6% vs. 30.3%, p = 0.41), and there were no differences in ICU (median 2 vs. 1 day, p = 0.60) or hospital (6 vs. 5 days, p = 0.24) length of stay. For DCD grafts, the rate of ischemic cholangiopathy was similar in the two groups (14.9% EAD vs. 17.5% no EAD, p = 0.69). One-year patient survival for grafts with and without EAD was 96.0% and 94.1% (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7−1.8; p = 0.54); one-year graft survival was 92.5% and 92.1% (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7−1.5; p = 0.88). Conclusions: In this cohort, EAD occurred in 52% of grafts. The occurrence of EAD, however, did not portend inferior outcomes. Compared to those without EAD, recipients with EAD had similar post-operative outcomes, as well as one-year patient and graft survival. EAD should be managed supportively and should not be viewed as a deterrent to utilization of non-ideal grafts.

Single Center Experience with Incidence, Impact and Predictors of Biliary Complications in Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation

Introduction: Utilizing allografts from donors after cardiac death (DCD) has improved organ availability, and DCD livers comprise a growing proportion of transplantations. However, it has been suggested that DCD transplantations have worse outcomes. Research Questions: We aimed to characterize outcomes in a large cohort of DCD transplantations, identify trends in outcomes over time, and identify factors associated with the development of biliary complications. Design: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of patients receiving DCD liver allografts within a large academic teaching hospital with a high transplantation volume. Consecutive patients who underwent Type III DCD liver transplantation from 2006-2016 were included in our cohort. Re-transplantations and multi-organ transplant recipients were excluded. Results: Ninety-six type III DCD transplantations occurred between 2006-2016. We report a 1one-year patient survival of 90.6% (87) and a 5five-year patient survival of 69.8% (67). Twenty-nine (30.2%) patients experienced any biliary complication in the first year following discharge, with 17 (17.7%) experiencing ischemic cholangiopathy. Five-year patient (P = 0.04) and graft (P = 0.005) survival improved over time. Post-operative biliary complications experienced during index admission and prior to discharge were found to be associated with the development of biliary complications (P = 0.005) and ischemic cholangiopathy (P = 0.01) following discharge. Conclusion: Our data suggested that outcomes using DCD allografts have improved, however biliary complications remain a significant issue in DCD transplantation. Patients who experienced post-operative biliary complications during index admission may require more frequent screening to allow the initiation of earlier treatment for biliary complications.

Classification of Distinct Patterns of Ischemic Cholangiopathy Following DCD Liver Transplantation: Distinct Clinical Courses and Long-term Outcomes From a Multicenter Cohort

BACKGROUND

As the number of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplants (LTs) performed in the United States continues to increase annually, there has been interest by policy makers to develop a more robust exception point safety net for patients who develop ischemic cholangiopathy (IC) following DCD LT. As such, there is a need for better understanding of the clinical course and long-term outcomes in patients who develop IC, as well as determining if IC can be classified into distinct categories with distinctly different clinical outcomes.

METHODS

All DCD LT performed at Mayo Clinic Florida, Mayo Clinic Arizona, and Mayo Clinic Rochester from January 1999 to March 2020 were included (N = 770). Outcomes were compared between 4 distinct radiologic patterns of IC: diffuse necrosis, multifocal progressive, confluence dominant, and minor form.

RESULTS

In total, 88 (11.4%) patients developed IC, of which 42 (5.5%) were listed for retransplantation of liver (ReLT). Patients with diffuse necrosis and multifocal progressive patterns suffered from frequent hospital admissions for cholangitis in the first year following DCD LT (median 3 and 2), were largely stent dependent (100% and 85.7%), and almost universally required ReLT. Patients with confluence dominant disease were managed with multiple stents and frequently recovered, ultimately becoming stent free without need for ReLT. Patients with the minor form IC did well with limited need for stent placement or repeat procedures and did not require ReLT. Graft survival was different between the 4 distinct IC patterns (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis provides a detailed analysis on the natural history and clinical course of IC. Patients developing IC can be classified into 4 distinct patterns with distinct clinical courses.

Disparities in the Use of Older Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Allografts in the United States Versus the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the differences between the United States and the United Kingdom in the characteristics and posttransplant survival of patients who received donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver allografts from donors aged >60 y.

METHODS

Data were collected from the UK Transplant Registry and the United Network for Organ Sharing databases. Cohorts were dichotomized into donor age subgroups (donor >60 y [D >60]; donor ≤60 y [D ≤60]). Study period: January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

1157 DCD LTs were performed in the United Kingdom versus 3394 in the United States. Only 13.8% of US DCD donors were aged >50 y, contrary to 44.3% in the United Kingdom. D >60 were 22.6% in the United Kingdom versus 2.4% in the United States. In the United Kingdom, 64.2% of D >60 clustered in 2 metropolitan centers. In the United States, there was marked inter-regional variation. A total of 78.3% of the US DCD allografts were used locally. One- and 5-y unadjusted DCD graft survival was higher in the United Kingdom versus the United States (87.3% versus 81.4%, and 78.0% versus 71.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). One- and 5-y D >60 graft survival was higher in the United Kingdom (87.3% versus 68.1%, and 77.9% versus 51.4%, United Kingdom versus United States, respectively; P < 0.001). In both groups, grafts from donors ≤30 y had the best survival. Survival was similar for donors aged 41 to 50 versus 51 to 60 in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the United Kingdom, older DCD LT utilization remained low in the United States, with worse D >60 survival. Nonetheless, present data indicate similar survivals for older donors aged ≤60, supporting an extension to the current US DCD age cutoff.

The volume - Outcomes relationship in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation

Background

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) has become an effective mechanism for expanding the donor pool and decreasing waitlist mortality. However, it is unclear if low‐volume DCD centers can achieve comparable outcomes to high‐volume centers.

Methods

From 2011 to 2019 utilizing the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, liver transplant centers were categorized into tertiles based on their annual volume of DCD LTs. Donor selection, recipient selection, and survival outcomes were compared between very‐low volume (VLV, n = 1–2 DCD LTs per year), low‐volume (LV, n = 3–5), and high‐volume (HV, n > 5) centers.

Results

One hundred and ten centers performed 3273 DCD LTs. VLV‐centers performed 339 (10.4%), LV‐centers performed 627 (19.2%), and HV‐centers performed 2307 (70.4%) LTs. 30‐day, 90‐day, and 1‐year patient and graft survival were significantly increased at HV‐centers (all P < .05). Recipients at HV‐centers had shorter waitlist durations (P < .01) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (P < .01). On multivariable regression, undergoing DCD LT at a VLV‐center or LV‐center was associated with increased 1‐year patient mortality (VLV‐OR:1.73, 1.12–2.69) (LV‐OR: 1.42, 1.01–2.00) and 1‐year graft failure (VLV‐OR: 1.79, 1.24–2.58) (LV‐OR: 1.28, .95–1.72).

Discussion

Increased annual DCD liver transplant volume is associated with improved patient and graft survival.

Early United States experience with liver donation after circulatory determination of death using thoraco-abdominal normothermic regional perfusion: A multi-institutional observational study

Mortality on the liver waitlist remains unacceptably high. Donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) donors are considered marginal but are a potentially underutilized resource. Thoraco-abdominal normothermic perfusion (TA-NRP) in DCD donors might result in higher quality livers and offset waitlist mortality. We retrospectively reviewed outcomes of the first 13 livers transplanted from TA-NRP donors in the US. Nine centers transplanted livers from 8 organ procurement organizations. Median donor age was 25 years; median agonal phase was 13 minutes. Median recipient age was 60 years; median lab MELD score was 21. Three patients (23%) met early allograft dysfunction (EAD) criteria. Three received simultaneous liver-kidney transplants; neither had EAD nor delayed renal allograft function. One recipient died 186 days post-transplant from sepsis but had normal pre-sepsis liver function. One patient developed a biliary anastomotic stricture, managed endoscopically; no recipient developed clinical evidence of ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Twelve of 13 (92%) patients are alive with good liver function at 439 days median follow-up; 1 patient has extrahepatic recurrent HCC. TA-NRP DCD livers in these recipients all functioned well, particularly with respect to IC, and provide a valuable option to decrease deaths on the waiting list. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Current practice of normothermic regional perfusion and machine perfusion in donation after circulatory death liver transplants in Italy

BACKGROUND

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and machine perfusion (MP) are variously used in many European centers to improve the outcomes after liver transplantation from donation after circulatory death (DCD). In Italy, a combination of NRP and subsequent MP has been used since the start of the activity. While NRP is mandatory for every DCD recovery, the subsequent use of MP is left to each center.

METHODS

We have designed a national survey to investigate practices and policies of these techniques. The questionnaire included 46 questions and was distributed to all the 21 Italian centers using an online form between June and July 2021.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 100%. A local NRP program for controlled Maastricht type 3 DCD was active in 11/21 (52.4%) centers. Organization and availability of personnel were perceived as the main difficulties in starting such a program. Between 2015 and 2020, 119 DCD livers were transplanted, with an overall utilization rate of 69.2%. Pump flow and gross aspect were considered the most reliable parameters in liver selection during NRP. Eight (72.7%) centers adopted subsequent hypothermic MP, 1 (9.1%) center normothermic MP, and the remaining 2 (18.2%) used both MP types.

CONCLUSION

This first snapshot survey shows that NRP with subsequent MP is the most used protocol in Italy for DCD livers, although some heterogeneity exists in the type and purpose of MP between centers. Overall, this policy ensures a high utilization rate, considering the high risk of the DCD donor population in Italy.

The changing impact of pre-liver transplant renal dysfunction on post-transplant survival: results of 2 decades from a single center

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Renal dysfunction before liver transplantation (LT) is associated with higher post-LT mortality. We aimed to study if this association still persisted in the contemporary transplant era.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data on 2871 primary LT performed at our center from 1998 to 2018. All patients were listed for LT alone and were not considered to be simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplant candidates. SLK recipients and those with previous LT were excluded. Patients were grouped into 4 eras: era-1 (1998-2002, n = 488), era-2 (2003-2007, n = 889), era-3 (2008-2012, n = 703) and era-4 (2013-2018, n = 791). Pre-LT renal dysfunction was defined as creatinine (Cr) >1.5 mg/dl or on dialysis at LT. The effect of pre-LT renal dysfunction on post-LT patient survival in each era was examined using Kaplan Meier estimates and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses.

RESULTS

Pre-LT renal dysfunction was present in 594 (20%) recipients. Compared to patients in era-1, patients in era-4 had higher Cr, lower eGFR and were more likely to be on dialysis at LT (P < 0.001). Pre-LT renal dysfunction was associated with worse 1, 3 and 5-year survival in era-1 and era-2 (P < 0.005) but not in era-3 or era-4 (P = 0.13 and P = 0.08, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the lack of independent effect of pre-LT renal dysfunction on post-LT mortality in era-3 and era-4. A separate analysis using eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² at LT to define renal dysfunction showed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-LT renal dysfunction had less impact on post-LT survival in the contemporary transplant era.

A multicentre outcome analysis to define global benchmarks for donation after circulatory death liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The concept of benchmarking is established in the field of transplant surgery; however, benchmark values for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation are not available. Thus, we aimed to identify the best possible outcomes in DCD liver transplantation and to propose outcome reference values.

METHODS

Based on 2,219 controlled DCD liver transplantations, collected from 17 centres in North America and Europe, we identified 1,012 low-risk, primary, adult liver transplantations with a laboratory MELD score of ≤20 points, receiving a DCD liver with a total donor warm ischemia time of ≤30 minutes and asystolic donor warm ischemia time of ≤15 minutes. Clinically relevant outcomes were selected and complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo-Grading and the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Corresponding benchmark cut-offs were based on median values of each centre, where the 75th-percentile was considered.

RESULTS

Benchmark cases represented between 19.7% and 75% of DCD transplantations in participating centres. The 1-year retransplant and mortality rates were 4.5% and 8.4% in the benchmark group, respectively. Within the first year of follow-up, 51.1% of recipients developed at least 1 major complication (≥Clavien-Dindo-Grade III). Benchmark cut-offs were ≤3 days and ≤16 days for ICU and hospital stay, ≤66% for severe recipient complications (≥Grade III), ≤16.8% for ischemic cholangiopathy, and ≤38.9 CCI points 1 year after transplant. Comparisons with higher risk groups showed more complications and impaired graft survival outside the benchmark cut-offs. Organ perfusion techniques reduced the complications to values below benchmark cut-offs, despite higher graft risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite excellent 1-year survival, morbidity in benchmark cases remains high. Benchmark cut-offs targeting morbidity parameters offer a valid tool to assess the protective value of new preservation technologies in higher risk groups and to provide a valid comparator cohort for future clinical trials.

LAY SUMMARY

The best possible outcomes after liver transplantation of grafts donated after circulatory death (DCD) were defined using the concept of benchmarking. These were based on 2,219 liver transplantations following controlled DCD donation in 17 centres worldwide. Donor and recipient combinations with higher risk had significantly worse outcomes. However, the use of novel organ perfusion technology helped high-risk patients achieve similar outcomes as the benchmark cohort.

Improved Survival With Higher-risk Donor Grafts in Liver Transplant With Acute-on-chronic Liver Failure

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Use of higher-risk grafts in liver transplantation for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has been associated with poor outcomes. This study analyzes trends in liver transplantation outcomes for ACLF over time based on the donor risk index (DRI).

Safely Expanding the Liver Donor Pool by Utilization of Organs from Donation after Circulatory Death with Comparable Results to Donation After Brain Death, a Large Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Use of livers donated after circulatory death (DCD) is one way to expand the donor pool. Our center has aggressively incorporated use of DCD liver grafts into practice. We examined our center and national outcomes as well as national DCD liver utilization.

METHODS

Liver transplants performed at our center and nationally from 11/2016 through 9/2020 were compared. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival, and national DCD liver utilization.

RESULTS

For our center, DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors were similar except DCD donors were younger (37 vs 40 years; p < 0.05). Recipient Na-MELD (20 vs 24; p < 0.0001) and cold ischemia time (4.63 vs 5.18 h; p < 0.05) were lower in DCD recipients. There were no significant differences in 1-year patient and graft survival between DCD and DBD liver recipients locally. Nationally, there was a difference in 1-year graft survival year (89.4% vs 92.4%, p < 0.0001) but patient survival was similar between groups. The proportion of DCD livers recovered and transplanted widely varied among organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar outcomes for DCD and DBD liver recipients should encourage centers and OPOs nationwide to expand utilization of DCD livers.

The Prognostic Utility of Intraoperative Allograft Vascular Inflow Measurements in Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation improves deceased donor liver use and decreases waitlist burden, albeit at an increased risk of biliary complications and inferior graft survival. Employing liver vascular inflow measurements intraoperatively permits allograft prognostication. However, its use in DCD liver transplantation is hitherto largely unknown and further explored here. DCD liver transplantation patient records at a single center from 2005 to 2018 were retrospectively scrutinized. Intraoperative flow data and relevant donor parameters were analyzed against endpoints of biliary events and graft survival. A total of 138 cases were chosen. The incidence of cumulative biliary complications was 38%, the majority of which were anastomotic strictures and managed successfully by endoscopic means. The ischemic cholangiopathy rate was 6%. At median thresholds of a portal vein (PV) flow rate of <92 mL/minute/100 g and buffer capacity (BC) of >0.04, both variables were independently associated with risk of biliary events (P = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). Graft survival was 90% at 12 months and 75% at 5 years. Cox regression analysis revealed a PV flow rate of <50 mL/minute/100 g as predictive of poorer graft survival (P = 0.01). Furthermore, 126 of these DCD livers were analyzed against a propensity-matched group of 378 contemporaneous donation after brain death liver allografts (1:3), revealing significantly higher rates (P < 0.001) of both early allograft dysfunction (70% versus 30%) and biliary complications (37% versus 20%) in the former group. Although flow data were comparable between both sets, PV flow and BC were predictive of biliary events only in the DCD cohort. Intraoperative inflow measurements therefore provide valuable prognostication on biliary/graft outcomes in DCD liver transplantation, can help inform graft surveillance, and its routine use is recommended.

Ischemic Cholangiopathy Postdonation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation: Donor Hepatectomy Time Matters

Background.

Outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) from donation after circulatory death (DCD) have been improving; however, ischemic cholangiopathy (IC) continues to be a problem. In 2014, measures to minimize donor hepatectomy time (DHT) and cold ischemic time (CIT) have been adopted to improve DCD LT outcomes.

Methods.

Retrospective review of all patients who underwent DCD LT between 2005 and 2017 was performed. We compared outcomes of patients who were transplanted before 2014 (historic group) with those who were transplanted between 2014 and 2017 (modern group).

Results.

We identified 112 patients; 44 were in the historic group and 68 in the modern group. Donors in the historic group were younger (26.5 versus 33, P = 0.007) and had a lower body mass index (26.2 versus 28.2, P = 0.007). DHT (min) and CIT (h) were significantly longer in the historic group (21.5 versus 14, P < 0.001 and 5.3 versus 4.2, P < 0.001, respectively). Fourteen patients (12.5%) developed IC, with a significantly higher incidence in the historic group (23.3% versus 6.1%, P = 0.02). There was no difference in graft and patient survival between both groups.

Conclusion.

In appropriately selected recipients, minimization of DHT and CIT may decrease the incidence of IC. These changes can potentially expand the DCD 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.

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.