Use of octogenarian donors for liver transplantation: a survival analysis

Is the Transplantation of Elderly and DCD Donors in Low MELD Recipients Justified: An Intent-to-treat Analysis

BACKGROUND

Thousands of people die or are removed from the liver transplant waitlist because of deterioration. One major challenge is the donor shortage. Increasing extended criteria donor (ECD) allograft usage can address this. We assessed whether transplanting ECD allografts provides a survival benefit versus remaining on the waitlist for standard allocation.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 132 073 liver transplant recipients from 2002 to 2020 via the United National Organ Sharing database was performed. Three survival analyses were performed on model end-stage liver disease (MELD) score inclusive ranges: 8-9, 10-15, and 16-18. Within each analysis, cohorts were divided into "transplanted" or the corresponding "intent-to-treat (ITT)" category. The transplanted cohort was separated into 2 definitions of ECD allografts: donations after circulatory death and donations from donors older than 70 y, along with all-other allografts. Ten-year survival was compared between the 3 transplanted groups and the ITT group.

RESULTS

When adjusted for covariates, multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses demonstrated that both ECD allografts and all-other allografts had better survival as compared with the ITT cohorts in each of separate analyses for MELD range 10-15 and MELD range 16-18 ( P  < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with MELD scores as low as 10, there is a survival benefit to using ECD allografts compared with those followed on an ITT basis.

Explainable machine learning for the assessment of donor grafts in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The shortage of liver grafts compared to recipients necessitates precise organ assessment. This study aimed to develop a Machine learning (ML) model to predict postoperative delayed graft function (DGF) and visualize the decision-making process for clinical application.

METHOD

Data from 5242 donor-recipient pairs who underwent liver transplantation (LT) at the top 10 liver transplant centers in China (January 2017 to December 2022) were collected. The dataset was divided into training and validation sets. Sixty-three variables, including demographics, donor characteristics, diagnosis, preoperative lab results, and surgical information were analyzed. The primary outcome was posttransplantation DGF and the second outcome was posttransplantation 1-month and 3-month survival. Recursive feature elimination selected critical variables, and models were built using ML algorithms and logistic regression. Model performance was evaluated by AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. The best model was validated with an independent dataset of 394 LT cases (January to June 2023). The SHapley Additive exPlanations package interpreted the top model's decisions.

RESULTS

Among 5242 cases, 328 (6.26%) developed DGF, with 15 cases (3.81%) in the external validation set. Thirty critical features were selected. The eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm achieved the highest AUC (0.877) and accuracy (0.936) in the internal set, and a comparable AUC (0.776) and accuracy (0.957) in the external set. SHAP analysis identified short perfusion time, high donor serum sodium, excessive bleeding during transplantation, high donor γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, and blood glucose levels as top predictors of post-LT DGF. The proposed model AUC's 1-month survival prediction was 0.841 and the 3-month survival prediction was 0.834.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed model for predicting postoperative DGF demonstrated excellent predictive performance, aiding clinicians in evaluating donor grafts and making informed decisions.

Prolonged allograft survival in liver transplantation

Introduction

Donor age has traditionally been considered a factor associated with allograft failure in liver transplantation. We sought to examine the characteristics and outcomes of all liver allografts with a cumulative age of over 80 years within the US to better understand liver senescence.

Methods

Using the UNOS STARfile, allografts with a cumulative age (sum of age at transplant plus post-transplant survival) of octogenarian, 90-99 nonagenarian, and 100 years or greater (centurion) were identified from all adult transplant recipients between 1990 and 2022. Donor and recipient data as well as outcomes were analyzed.

Results

There were 3437 octogenarian, 622 nonagenarian, and 29 centurion allografts. Donors from allografts with prolonged cumulative age had less diabetes, less alcohol use, and fewer infections compared to all other donors. Recipients had significantly lower MELD scores at the time of transplant and dialysis rates.

Conclusions

Careful matching of older donors with lower MELD recipients results in excellent outcomes as evidenced by the presence of prolonged cumulative age livers, demonstrating the resilience of the liver to senescent events in appropriately matched recipients.

Outcomes of liver transplantation with donors older than 80 years in HCV patients treated with direct-action antivirals vs. non-HCV patients

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have shown good results with the use of octogenarian donors in non-HCV recipients and its use is universally accepted worldwide. There are no studies analyzing differences between hepatitis C virus (HCV) and non-HCV recipients transplanted with donors≥80 years in the direct-action antivirals (DAA) period. The rate of liver transplantation (LT) using old donors is still low, and a change in the acceptance of these grafts could increase the liver pool available for LT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Since the introduction of DAA therapy in our hospital in January 2014 to May 2022, 457 LT were performed, and 74 (16.2%) of these patients underwent LT with donors≥80 years. A cohort study was carried-out comparing 15 HCV-positive recipients vs. 59 HCV-negative patients during the period of the study.

RESULTS

Recipients were younger in the non-HCV group. MELD and subsequently DMELD were higher in non-HCV group. Nevertheless, the association of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with HCV cirrhosis was higher than with non-HCV cirrhosis (86.7% vs. 28.8%; p<0.001), but there were no recurrences within HCV group and only 1 case in the non-HCV group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-years patient and graft survival were similar in both groups. Recipient age and intraoperative transfusion requirements were predictors of graft survival [(HR 1.10, 95CI 1.01-1.21; p=0.03) and (HR 1.03, 95CI 1.01-1.05; p<0.001), respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the use of octogenarian donors was a safe alternative to younger donors in HCV recipients requiring LT in the era of DAA with similar results to those obtained in non-HCV patients.

Multinational Analysis of Marginal Liver Grafts Based on the Eurotransplant Extended Donor Criteria

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of marginal liver grafts based on the Eurotransplant extended criteria donor (ECD) criteria.

BACKGROUND

Eurotransplant uses a broad definition of ECD criteria (age >65 years, steatosis >40%, body mass index >30 kg/m 2 , intensive care unit stay >7 days, donation after circulatory death, and certain laboratory parameters) for allocating organs to recipients who have consented to marginal grafts. Historically, marginal liver grafts were associated with increased rates of dysfunction.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis using the German Transplant Registry and the U.S. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) from 2006 to 2016. Results were validated with recent SRTR data (2017-2022). Donors were classified according to the Eurotransplant ECD criteria, donation after circulatory death was excluded. Data were analyzed with cutoff prediction, binomial logistic regression, and multivariate Cox regression.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 92,330 deceased brain-dead donors (87% SRTR) and 70,374 transplants (87% SRTR) in adult recipients. Predominant ECD factors were donor age in Germany (30%) and body mass index in the United States (28%). Except for donor age, grafts meeting ECD criteria were not associated with impaired 1 or 3-year survival. Cutoffs had little to no predictive value for 30-day graft survival (area under the receiver operating curve: 0.49-0.52) and were nominally higher for age (72 vs 65 years) in Germany as compared with those defined by current Eurotransplant criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of transplanted grafts from higher risk donors was nearly equal to standard donors with Eurotransplant criteria failing to predict survival of marginal grafts. Modifying ECD criteria could improve graft allocation and potentially expand the donor pool.

Impact of aging on peribiliary glands in ischemia-reperfusion injury

BACKGROUND

The detailed mechanisms underlying the development of ischemia-type biliary lesions (ITBLs) in aged donor grafts remain unclear. In the present study we aimed to investigate the impact of aging on the response of the peribiliary gland (PBG) to ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and its temporal changes.

METHODS

Experiments were performed using a 90-min partial warm liver ischemia model in male Wistar rats of two age groups: young (7-8 weeks old) and old (52-60 weeks old). Liver tissues were obtained 24, 72, and 168 h after IRI. Histopathological and immunohistochemical assessments of the perihilar bile duct (PHBD), including the PBG, distal to the clip-clamped site were performed.

RESULTS

Young rats showed little change in the bile duct tissues after IRI. However, old rats showed an increased PBG volume in the PHBD and marked PBG cell proliferation 24 h after IRI. Bile duct wall thickening with narrowing of the lumen peaked 72 h after IRI. Mucus production and oxidative stress in the PBG were significantly higher in old than in young rats after IRI. These findings showed a trend toward improvement 168 h after IRI.

CONCLUSION

Age-dependent differences in the response of the PBG to IRI may be related to differences in ITBL frequency.

Utilization of older deceased donors for pediatric liver transplant may negatively impact long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Multiple adult studies have investigated the role of older donors (ODs) in expanding the donor pool. However, the impact of donor age on pediatric liver transplantation (LT) has not been fully elucidated.

METHODS

UNOS database was used to identify pediatric (≤18 years) LTs performed in the United States during 2002-22. Donors ≥40 years at donation were classified as older donors (ODs). Propensity analysis was performed with 1:1 matching for potentially confounding variables.

RESULTS

A total of 10,024 pediatric liver transplantation (PLT) patients met inclusion criteria; 669 received liver grafts from ODs. Candidates receiving OD liver grafts were more likely to be transplanted for acute liver failure, have higher Model End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD/PELD) scores at LT, listed as Status 1/1A at LT, and be in the intensive care unit (ICU) at time of LT (all p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier (KM) analyses showed that recipients of OD grafts had worse patient and graft survival (p < 0.001) compared to recipients of younger donor (YD) grafts. KM analyses performed on candidates matched for acuity at LT revealed inferior patient and graft survival in recipients of deceased donor grafts (p < 0.001), but not living donor grafts (p > 0.1) from ODs. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that living donor LT, diagnosis of biliary atresia and first liver transplant were favorable predictors of recipient outcomes, whereas ICU stay before LT and transplantation during 2002-12 were unfavorable.

CONCLUSION

Livers from ODs were used for candidates with higher acuity. Pediatric recipients of livers from ODs had worse outcome compared to YDs; however, living donor LT from ODs had the least negative impact on recipient outcomes.

Post-transplant biliary complications using liver grafts from deceased donors older than 70 years: Retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

The shortage of liver grafts and subsequent waitlist mortality led us to expand the donor pool using liver grafts from older donors.

AIM

To determine the incidence, outcomes, and risk factors for biliary complications (BC) in liver transplantation (LT) using liver grafts from donors aged > 70 years.

METHODS

Between January 1994 and December 31, 2019, 297 LTs were performed using donors older than 70 years. After excluding 47 LT for several reasons, we divided 250 LTs into two groups, namely post-LT BC (n = 21) and without BC (n = 229). This retrospective case-control study compared both groups.

RESULTS

Choledocho-choledochostomy without T-tube was the most frequent technique (76.2% in the BC group vs 92.6% in the non-BC group). Twenty-one patients (8.4%) developed BC (13 anastomotic strictures, 7 biliary leakages, and 1 non-anastomotic biliary stricture). Nine patients underwent percutaneous balloon dilation and nine required a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy because of dilation failure. The incidence of post-LT complications (graft dysfunction, rejection, renal failure, and non-BC reoperations) was similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in the patient and graft survival between the groups. Moreover, only three deaths were attributed to BC. While female donors were protective factors for BC, donor cardiac arrest was a risk factor.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of BC was relatively low on using liver grafts > 70 years. It could be managed in most cases by percutaneous dilation or Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, without significant differences in the patient or graft survival between the groups.

Outcome of liver transplantation in elderly patients: an Italian multicenter case-control study

Despite the controversial results of liver transplantation (LT) in elderly recipients, the proportion of patients continues to increase. This study investigated the outcome of LT in elderly patients (≥ 65 years) in an Italian, multicenter cohort. Between January 2014 and December 2019, 693 eligible patients were transplanted, and two groups were compared: recipients ≥ 65 years (n = 174, 25.1%) versus 50-59 years (n = 519, 74.9%). Confounders were balanced using a stabilized inverse probability therapy weighting (IPTW). Elderly patients showed more frequent early allograft dysfunction (23.9 versus 16.8%, p = 0.04). Control patients had longer posttransplant hospital stays (median: 14 versus 13 days; p = 0.02), while no difference was observed for posttransplant complications (p = 0.20). At multivariable analysis, recipient age ≥ 65 years was an independent risk factor for patient death (HR  1.76; p = 0.002) and graft loss (HR  1.63; p = 0.005). The 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year patient survival rates were 82.6, 79.8, and 66.4% versus 91.1, 88.5, and 82.0% in the elderly and control group, respectively (log-rank p = 0.001). The 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year graft survival rates were 81.5, 78.7, and 66.0% versus 90.2, 87.2, and 79.9% in the elderly and control group, respectively (log-rank p = 0.003). Elderly patients with CIT > 420 min showed 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year patient survival rates of 75.7%, 72.8%, and 58.5% versus 90.4%, 86.5%, and 79.4% for controls (log-rank p = 0.001). LT in elderly (≥ 65 years) recipients provides favorable results, but inferior to those achieved in younger patients (50-59), especially when CIT > 7 h. Containment of cold ischemia time seems pivotal for favorable outcomes in this class of patients.

Severe Atherosclerosis in Donor Liver Vasculature: An Illustrative Case Report and Review of the Literature

As the scarcity of transplantable organs continues to increase, juxtaposed with an aging donor population, transplant surgeons are increasingly confronted with marginal organ offers. The presence of atherosclerosis in the donor allograft has been shown to compromise the vascular integrity and predispose to vascular complications in the transplanted liver. Here, we present a case of 54-year-old brain-dead donor who was discovered to have a severely diseased aorta during organ recovery. Pathologic evaluation revealed severe atherosclerosis with calcifications. Because there was no evidence of donor graft dysfunction, we elected to proceed with implantation, although thoughtful consideration was given to aborting the procedure. The donor hepatic artery was resected from the bifurcation of the splenic artery and the common hepatic artery until no further gross atheromas were evident; this segment was then anastomosed with the recipient proper hepatic artery. The recipient is doing well 6 months after transplant without any significant adverse postoperative events. The presence of severe atherosclerosis should not discourage the use of an otherwise adequate graft. Novel newer preservation techniques, such as normothermic perfusion, may enable functional graft evaluation and can increase the utilization of marginal grafts.

Normothermic Machine Perfusion—Improving the Supply of Transplantable Livers for High-Risk Recipients

The effectiveness of liver transplantation to cure numerous diseases, alleviate suffering, and improve patient survival has led to an ever increasing demand. Improvements in preoperative management, surgical technique, and postoperative care have allowed increasingly complicated and high-risk patients to be safely transplanted. As a result, many patients are safely transplanted in the modern era that would have been considered untransplantable in times gone by. Despite this, more gains are possible as the science behind transplantation is increasingly understood. Normothermic machine perfusion of liver grafts builds on these gains further by increasing the safe use of grafts with suboptimal features, through objective assessment of both hepatocyte and cholangiocyte function. This technology can minimize cold ischemia, but prolong total preservation time, with particular benefits for suboptimal grafts and surgically challenging recipients. In addition to more physiological and favorable preservation conditions for grafts with risk factors for poor outcome, the extended preservation time benefits operative logistics by allowing a careful explant and complicated vascular reconstruction when presented with challenging surgical scenarios. This technology represents a significant advancement in graft preservation techniques and the transplant community must continue to incorporate this technology to ensure the benefits of liver transplant are maximized.

The impact of hepatitis C virus direct acting agents in liver transplant using very old donor grafts: a real-world single-center analysis

The correct timing of use of direct acting agents (DAAs) among transplanted patients remains unknown. The aim of this paperwork is to evaluate the impact of DAAs treatment in pre- or peri-operative period in liver transplantation when grafts ≥ 70 years are used. This is a retrospective analysis comparing adult liver transplant performed for HCV-related cirrhosis and/or hepatocarcinoma using a graft ≥ 70 in the period 2015-2018 (Group DAA-HCV-OLD, study group) to three different groups: (a) anti-HCV-Ab-negative patients receiving graft ≥ 70 (no-HCV-OLD), (b) anti-HCV-Ab-negative patients receiving a graft aged 18-69 years (no-HCV-YOUNG), and (c) anti-HCV-Ab-positive patients receiving a donor graft ≥ 70 in the period 2007-2011 (no-DAA-HCV-OLD). Totally, 528 liver transplants were considered: 164 in DAA-HCV-OLD, 143 in no-HCV-OLD, 120 in no-HCV-YOUNG and 101 in no-DAA-HCV-OLD Group. Graft survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 88% and 81% in DAA-HCV-OLD Group, 82% and 68% in no-DAA-HCV-OLD (p = 0.007), 89% and 84% in no-HCV-OLD (p = 0.76), and 94% and 92% in no-HCV-YOUNG (p = 0.02). No differences were observed among groups in the incidence of primary non-function, primary dysfunction, vascular or biliary complications. DAAs were able to zero HCV-related graft loss, with a 3-year graft survival > 80%. The outcomes of older graft recipients became equal irrespectively of their HCV serological status.

An Update on Usage of High-Risk Donors in Liver Transplantation

The ideal management for end stage liver disease, acute liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), within specific criteria, is liver transplantation (LT). Over the years, there has been a steady increase in the candidates listed for LT, without a corresponding increase in the donor pool. Therefore, due to organ shortage, it has been substantially difficult to reduce waitlist mortality among patients awaiting LT. Thus, marginal donors such as elderly donors, steatotic donors, split liver, and donors after cardiac death (DCD), which were once not commonly used, are now considered. Furthermore, it is encouraging to see the passing of Acts, such as the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act, enabling further research and development in utilizing HIV grafts. Subsequently, the newer antivirals have aided in successful post-transplant period, especially for hepatitis C positive grafts. However, currently, there is no standardization, and protocols are center specific in the usage of marginal donors. Therefore, studies with longer follow ups are required to standardize its use.

Effluent Molecular Analysis Guides Liver Graft Allocation to Clinical Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion

Hypothermic-oxygenated-machine-perfusion (HOPE) allows assessment/reconditioning of livers procured from high-risk donors before transplantation. Graft referral to HOPE mostly depends on surgeons' subjective judgment, as objective criteria are still insufficient. We investigated whether analysis of effluent fluids collected upon organ flush during static-cold-storage can improve selection criteria for HOPE utilization. Effluents were analyzed to determine cytolysis enzymes, metabolites, inflammation-related mediators, and damage-associated-molecular-patterns. Molecular profiles were assessed by unsupervised cluster analysis. Differences between "machine perfusion (MP)-yes" vs. "MP-no"; "brain-death (DBD) vs. donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD)"; "early-allograft-dysfunction (EAD)-yes" vs. "EAD-no" groups, as well as correlation between effluent variables and transplantation outcome, were investigated. Livers assigned to HOPE (n = 18) showed a different molecular profile relative to grafts transplanted without this procedure (n = 21, p = 0.021). Increases in the inflammatory mediators PTX3 (p = 0.048), CXCL8/IL-8 (p = 0.017), TNF-α (p = 0.038), and ANGPTL4 (p = 0.010) were observed, whereas the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 was reduced (p = 0.007). Peculiar inflammation, cell death, and coagulation signatures were observed in fluids collected from DCD livers compared to those from DBD grafts. AST (p = 0.034), ALT (p = 0.047), and LDH (p = 0.047) were higher in the "EAD-yes" compared to the "EAD-no" group. Cytolysis markers and hyaluronan correlated with recipient creatinine, AST, and ICU stay. The study demonstrates that effluent molecular analysis can provide directions about the use of HOPE.

Advanced donor age does not increase risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation: a retrospective two-centre analysis using competing risk analysis

The impact of donor age on the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation is still debated. Between 2002 and 2014, all patients transplanted for HCC in 2 European liver transplantation tertiary centres were retrospectively reviewed. Risk factors for HCC recurrence were assessed using competing risk analysis, and the impact of donor age < or ≥65 years and < or ≥80 years was specifically evaluated after propensity score matching. 728 patients transplanted with a median follow-up of 86 months were analysed. The 1-, 3- and 5-year recurrence rates were 4.9%, 10.7% and 13.9%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, recipient age (sHR: 0.96 [0.93; 0.98], P < 0.01), number of lesions (sHR: 1.05 [1.04; 1.06], P < 0.001), maximum size of the lesions (sHR: 1.37 [1.27; 1.48], P < 0.01), presence of a hepatocholangiocarcinoma (sHR: 6.47 [2.91; 14.38], P < 0.01) and microvascular invasion (sHR: 3.48 [2.42; 5.02], P < 0.01) were significantly associated with HCC recurrence. After propensity score matching, neither donor age ≥65 (P = 0.29) nor donor age ≥80 (P = 0.84) years increased the risk of HCC recurrence. In conclusion, donor age was not found to be a risk factor for HCC recurrence. Patients listed for HCC can receive a graft from an elderly donor without compromising the outcome.

Pediatric discard risk index for predicting pediatric liver allograft discard

BACKGROUND

Of the 600 pediatric candidates added to the liver waiting list annually, 100 will remain waiting while over 100 liver allografts are discarded, often for subjective reasons.

METHODS

We created a risk index to predict discard to better optimize donor supply. We used the UNOS database to retrospectively analyze 17 367 deceased donors (≤18 years old) through univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Deceased donor clinical characteristics and laboratory values were independent variables with discard being the dependent variable in the analysis. Significant univariate factors (P-value < .05) comprised the multivariate analysis. Significant variables from the multivariate analysis were incorporated into the pDSRI, producing a risk score for discard.

RESULTS

From 17 potential factors, 11 were identified as significant predictors (P < .05) of pediatric liver allograft discard. The most significant risk factors were as follows: DCD; total bilirubin >10 mg/dL, and alanine transaminase (ALT) ≥500 IU/L. The pDSRI has a C-statistic of 0.846 for the training set and 0.840 for the validation set.

CONCLUSION

The pDSRI uses 11 significant risk factors, including elevated liver function tests, donor demographics, and donor risk/type to accurately predict risk of pediatric liver allograft discard and serve as a tool that may maximize donor yield.

Extended criteria grafts and emerging therapeutics strategy in liver transplantation. The unstable balance between damage and repair

Due to increasing demand for donor organs, "extended criteria" donors are increasingly considered for liver transplantation, including elderly donors and donors after cardiac death. The grafts of this subgroup of donors share a major risk to develop significant features of ischemia reperfusion injury, that may eventually lead to graft failure. Ex-situ machine perfusion technology has gained much interest in liver transplantation, because represents both a useful tool for improving graft quality before transplantation and a platform for the delivery of therapeutics directly to the organ. In this review, we survey ongoing clinical evidences supporting the use of elderly and DCD donors in liver transplantation, and the underlying mechanistic aspects of liver aging and ischemia reperfusion injury that influence graft quality and transplant outcome. Finally, we highlight evidences in the field of new therapeutics to test in MP in the context of recent findings of basic and translational research.

Safe use of livers from deceased donors older than 70 years in recipients with HCV cirrhosis treated with direct-action antivirals. Retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There is controversy regarding the use of older grafts for liver transplantation (LT) in HCV-infected patients, but the introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) can radically change that debate.

METHODS

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate outcomes of the use of liver grafts from donors older than 70 years in recipients with HCV infection who underwent pre- or post-LT treatment with DAA. We compared two groups of patients who underwent LT using livers >70 years; the groups were defined according to antiviral therapy: non-DAA therapy group (n = 62; LT between May 1996 and December 2013), and DAA therapy group (n = 31; LT between January 2014 and December 2019).

RESULTS

Thirty (96.8%) patients of DAA therapy and nine (14.5%) of non-DAA therapy (21 patients underwent complete therapy with interferon-ribavirin) achieved sustained viral response (SVR). One, 3-, and 5-year patient survival were 83.9%, 67.7%, and 56.5% in the non-DAA group vs 93.5%, 88.4%, and 88.4% in the DAA group (P = 0.04); the 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival were 77.4%, 62.9%, and 51.6% in the non-DAA group vs. 88.6%, 83.7%, and 83.7% in the DAA group (P = 0.03). Multivariate analysis demonstrated donor female sex and DAA therapy as protective factors of graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre- or post-LT therapy with DAA in HCV-infected patients has achieved an almost overall SVR. The use of liver grafts >70 years in these patients treated with DAA was associated with significantly higher 5-year patient and graft survival in DAA group compared to non-DAA group. Thus, the introduction of DAA therapy has allowed the safe use of livers >70 years in HCV-positive recipients.

Impact of Donor Age on the Outcome of Living-donor Liver Transplantation: Special Consideration to the Feasibility of Using Elderly Donors

BACKGROUND

The use of elderly donors (≥60 y) in living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety of surgery for elderly donors and the impact of donor age on LDLT outcomes.

METHODS

We, retrospectively, reviewed 470 cases of LDLT at Kumamoto University Hospital from December 1998 to March 2017.

RESULTS

Donors were divided into 5 groups according to age: 20-29 (n = 109), 30-39 (n = 157), 40-49 (n = 87), 50-59 (n = 81), and ≥60 (n = 36). At our institution, elderly donor candidates required additional preoperative work-up. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications and duration of postoperative hospital stay among the 5 donor groups. Regardless of graft type, elderly donors were comparable to younger donor groups (<30 y) in postoperative recovery of liver function. Risk-adjusted overall survival rates of recipients among donor groups were not significantly different. Additionally, donor age was not significantly associated with 6-month graft survival of adult and pediatric recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly candidates ≥60 years of age can safely be selected as LDLT donors after meticulous preoperative work-up.

Transplant of Elderly Patients: Is There an Upper Age Cutoff?

Increased life expectancy and advances in the care of chronic liver disease has increased the number of elderly patients needing liver transplant. Organ donation policies prioritize transplant to the sickest. There is an ongoing debate with regard to balancing the principles of equity and utility. Several hospitals have adopted center-specific policies and there has been an increased trend of transplant in elderly patients since 2002. Appropriate patient selection and long-term outcomes in the setting of limited organ availability pose several challenges. This article reviews the data and discusses the pros and cons of transplants in the elderly.

Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Model to Estimate Early Allograft Failure Among Patients Requiring Early Liver Retransplant

IMPORTANCE

Expansion of donor acceptance criteria for liver transplant increased the risk for early allograft failure (EAF), and although EAF prediction is pivotal to optimize transplant outcomes, there is no consensus on specific EAF indicators or timing to evaluate EAF. Recently, the Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplantation (L-GrAFT) algorithm, based on aspartate transaminase, bilirubin, platelet, and international normalized ratio kinetics, was developed from a single-center database gathered from 2002 to 2015.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a simplified comprehensive model estimating at day 10 after liver transplant the EAF risk at day 90 (the Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation [EASE] score) and, secondarily, to identify early those patients with unsustainable EAF risk who are suitable for retransplant.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter cohort study was designed to develop a score capturing a continuum from normal graft function to nonfunction after transplant. Both parenchymal and vascular factors, which provide an indication to list for retransplant, were included among the EAF determinants. The L-GrAFT kinetic approach was adopted and modified with fewer data entries and novel variables. The population included 1609 patients in Italy for the derivation set and 538 patients in the UK for the validation set; all were patients who underwent transplant in 2016 and 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Early allograft failure was defined as graft failure (codified by retransplant or death) for any reason within 90 days after transplant.

RESULTS

At day 90 after transplant, the incidence of EAF was 110 of 1609 patients (6.8%) in the derivation set and 41 of 538 patients (7.6%) in the external validation set. Median (interquartile range) ages were 57 (51-62) years in the derivation data set and 56 (49-62) years in the validation data set. The EASE score was developed through 17 entries derived from 8 variables, including the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, blood transfusion, early thrombosis of hepatic vessels, and kinetic parameters of transaminases, platelet count, and bilirubin. Donor parameters (age, donation after cardiac death, and machine perfusion) were not associated with EAF risk. Results were adjusted for transplant center volume. In receiver operating characteristic curve analyses, the EASE score outperformed L-GrAFT, Model for Early Allograft Function, Early Allograft Dysfunction, Eurotransplant Donor Risk Index, donor age × Model for End-stage Liver Disease, and Donor Risk Index scores, estimating day 90 EAF in 87% (95% CI, 83%-91%) of cases in both the derivation data set and the internal validation data set. Patients could be stratified in 5 classes, with those in the highest class exhibiting unsustainable EAF risk.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that the developed EASE score reliably estimated EAF risk. Knowledge of contributing factors may help clinicians to mitigate risk factors and guide them through the challenging clinical decision to allocate patients to early liver retransplant. The EASE score may be used in translational research across transplant centers.

Liver transplantation and aging

An increase in the average life expectancy, paralleled by a demographic shift in the population with end-stage liver disease lies behind the rising demand for liver transplantation (LT) among the elderly. Some of the most common indications for LT including hepatocellular carcinoma, alcohol-related liver disease, chronic hepatitis C and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease tend to affect older patients. Transplant professionals are faced with an increasing demand for LT among elderly patients in an age of organ shortage and it is important that risk and benefits are carefully weighed in order to achieve the optimum use of precious liver grafts.

Trends in Outcomes for Marginal Allografts in Liver Transplant

IMPORTANCE

Investigating outcomes after marginal allograft transplant is essential in determining appropriate and more aggressive use of these allografts.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the time trends in the outcomes of marginal liver allografts as defined by 6 different sets of criteria.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this case-control, multicenter study, 75 050 patients who received a liver transplant between March 1, 2002, and September 30, 2016, were retrospectively analyzed to last known follow-up (n = 55 395) or death (n = 19 655) using the United Network for Organ Sharing Database. The study period was divided into three 5-year eras: 2002-2006, 2007-2011, and 2012-2016. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were used to examine the allograft after transplant with marginal allografts, which were defined as 90th percentile Donor Risk Index allografts (calculated over the entire study period), donor after circulatory death allografts, national share allografts, old age (donors >70 years) allografts, fatty liver allografts, and 90th percentile Discard Risk Index allografts. Statistical analysis was performed from August to December 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Allograft failure after transplant as defined by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database.

RESULTS

Among the 75 050 patients (44 394 men; mean [SD] age, 54.3 [9.9] years) in the study, Donor Risk Index, patient Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores, and balance of risk scores significantly increased over time. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated that 90th percentile Donor Risk Index allograft survival increased across the study period (2002-2006: hazard ratio, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.34-1.49]; 2007-2011: hazard ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.17-1.34]; 2012-2016: hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.98-1.24]). Secondary definitions of marginal allografts (donor after circulatory death, national share, old age donors, fatty liver, and 90th percentile Discard Risk Index) showed similar improvements in allograft survival.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The study's findings encourage the aggressive use of liver allografts and may indicate a need for a redefinition of allograft marginality in liver transplantation.

Successful Transplant of a Liver Graft After Giant Hepatic Artery Aneurysm Resection and Reconstruction

The shortage of organs has pushed transplant surgeons to accept liver grafts with extended criteria, but severe vascular abnormalities may still discourage the use of otherwise acceptable organs. We report herein the case of a liver graft with a 64-mm aneurysm of the proper hepatic artery extended to the origin of the right and left hepatic branches. The graft was deemed unsuitable for transplant by all other centers in the region. However, liver function tests were normal, and there was no evidence of compromised arterial supply. At back table, we resected the aneurysm and anastomosed the right and left hepatic arteries to a vascular graft obtained from the distal tract of the donor's superior mesenteric artery. After portal reperfusion, we anastomosed the mesenteric graft to the recipient's hepatic artery at the origin of the gastroduodenal artery. The postoperative course and the subsequent 6-month follow-up were uneventful. In conclusion, the presence of a hepatic artery aneurysm should not be an absolute contraindication to the use of a liver graft. The present case emphasizes the possibility to utilize an organ that would have been otherwise discarded.

A learning curve in using orphan liver allografts for transplantation

Given the critical shortage of donor livers, marginal liver allografts have potential to increase donor supply. We investigate trends and long-term outcomes of liver transplant using national share allografts transplanted after rejection at the local and regional levels. We studied a cohort of 75 050 candidates listed in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network for liver transplantation between 2002 and 2016. We compared patients receiving national share and regional/local share allografts from 2002-2006, 2007-2011, and 2012-2016, performing multivariate Cox regression for graft survival. Recipient and center-level covariates that were not significant (P < .05) were removed. Graft survival of national share allografts improved over time. National share allografts had a 26% increased risk for graft failure in 2002-2006 but no impact on graft survival in 2007-2011 and 2012-2016. The cold ischemia time (CIT) of national share allografts decreased from 10.4 to 8.0 hours. We demonstrate that CIT had significant impact on graft survival using national share allografts (CIT <6 hours: hazard ratio 0.75 and CIT >12 hours: hazard ratio 1.25). Despite a trend toward sicker recipients and poorer quality allografts, graft survival outcomes using national share allografts have improved to benchmark levels. Reduction in cold ischemia time is a possible explanation.

Improvement in Liver Transplant Outcomes From Older Donors: A US National Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate trends in long-term graft and patient outcomes following liver transplantation using grafts from donors ≥60 years old.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The scarcity of donor livers has led to increased utilization of organs from donors ≥60 years old. However, few studies have examined how long-term transplant outcomes from older donors have evolved over time.

METHODS

The OPTN/UNOS database was queried for all first-time isolated adult liver transplants. We identified 14,796 adult liver transplant using donors ≧60-year-old suitable for analysis from 1990 to 2014. Cohorts were then developed based on 5-year intervals of transplant date. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare graft and patient survival for recipients from older donor across each 5-year era.

RESULTS

Utilization of donor grafts ≥60 years old increased steadily for the first 15 years of the study, but has leveled off over the last 10 years. Comparison of the earliest and latest eras in the study was notable for an increase in median recipient age (51 vs. 59, P < 0.001) and reduction in median cold ischemic time (10 vs. 6 h, P = 0.001). Unadjusted 5-year graft and patient survival has improved significantly over time (P < 0.0001). More importantly, the discrepancy in survival between older and younger grafts has narrowed substantially over time (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates significant improvement in transplant outcomes with donor grafts ≥60-years old and supports increased but judicious use of extended criteria donors liver grafts. Improved patient selection and reduction in cold ischemia time appear to be contributing factors.

Comorbidities and Age in Brain-Dead Donors and Liver Transplantation: A 15-Year Retrospective Investigation

OBJECTIVES

Although livers from older donors (> 70 y) have been shown to be increasingly more efficiently used for transplant, donor comorbidities are considered additional risk factors. This is quite intriguing as comorbidities are known to increase with advancing age in the donor population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed whether age and donor comorbidities influenced liver procurement over a 15-year period in a cohort of 1702 brain-dead donors in Tuscany, Italy.

RESULTS

Over the study period, age of potential donors significantly increased (P = .02) as well as the proportion of patients who were > 55 years old. The incidence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previously known coronary artery disease also significantly increased. We observed a progressive increase in the number of transplanted livers from donors with advancing age despite an increase in comorbidities. The highest incidences of traumatic brain injury and anoxic brain injury were observed in the youngest donors. Transaminase levels and use of vasoactive drugs were lower in donors who were ≥ 72 years old.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, criteria for liver donors have already changed. Although age does not seem to be a limiting factor, older donors deserve a more accurate donor selection due to the higher incidence of risk factors (primarily diabetes mellitus).

[High donor age for liver transplantation : Tackling organ scarcity in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is the only curative treatment option for patients with end-stage liver disease; however, the 40% decline of available organ donors in recent years in Germany necessitates the optimization of available resources and possibly extending the criteria to older donors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All 2652 livers made available to the Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin from 2010 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed and the clinical outcome of 526 liver transplantations during this time frame were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median age of donors of transplanted organs increased from 49.3 years in 2010 to 57.3 years in 2016 (p = 0.02). Organs from donors ≥65 years were more frequently discarded than organs from younger donors (n = 344, 18.4% vs. n = 220, 28.1%; p = 0.005). Moreover, the older donors had higher rates of diabetes mellitus and hepatic steatosis. Organs from older donors had a higher donor risk index (2.8 vs. 2.2; p < 0.001) and were transplanted more often in patients with preserved liver function and hepatocellular carcinoma and liver cirrhosis (n = 121, 74.7% of indications). The 3‑year survival after liver transplantation from donors ≥65 and ≥80 years old was not significantly reduced in comparison to younger donors; however, there was an increased retransplantation rate (28.6%; p = 0.005) after transplantation of organs from donors ≥80 years old.

CONCLUSION

Despite conservative organ acceptance there were higher rates of retransplantation after transplantation from very old donors. In the light of an increasing scarcity of suitable organs this mandates caution and highlights the need for adequate assessment instruments for marginal donor organs before transplantation.

Grafts from selected deceased donors over 80 years old can safely expand the number of liver transplants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present the outcome of deceased adult liver transplantation from octogenarian (≥80 years old) donors compared to younger grafts.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on six databases to identify all available original papers that report the outcome of adult recipients who underwent liver transplantation from a deceased octogenarian donor.

RESULTS

Overall, 39,034 liver transplantations from 12 studies were reported with 789 (2.02%) cases receiving grafts from octogenarian donors. Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference regarding the one, three, and five-year graft and patient survival between the recipients of livers <80 years old and octogenarian grafts. There were significantly more episodes of biliary complications in the recipients of octogenarian grafts (34/459; 7.4%) in comparison to the recipients of livers <80 years old (372/37074; 1.0%) (OR 0.53; 95% CI = 0.35-0.81; P 0.004; I² = 0%). The incidence of primary non-function, vascular complications and re-transplantation did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and medium-term graft and patient survival of octogenarian liver transplantation is not inferior compared to the liver transplantation with younger grafts, however with a higher rate of biliary complications.

Survival benefit of accepting livers from deceased donors over 70 years old

Livers from older donors (OLDs; age ≥70) are risky and often declined; however, it is likely that some candidates will benefit from OLDs versus waiting for younger ones. To characterize the survival benefit of accepting OLD grafts, we used 2009-2017 SRTR data to identify 24 431 adult liver transplant (LT) candidates who were offered OLD grafts eventually accepted by someone. Outcomes from the time-of-offer were compared between candidates who accepted an OLD graft and matched controls within MELD ± 2 who declined the same offer. Candidates who accepted OLD grafts (n = 1311) were older (60.5 vs. 57.8 years, P < .001), had a higher median MELD score (25 vs. 22, P < .001), and were less likely to have hepatitis C cirrhosis (14.9% vs. 31.2%, P < .001). Five-year cumulative mortality among those who accepted versus declined the same OLD offer was 23.4% versus 41.2% (P < .001). Candidates who accepted OLDs experienced an almost twofold reduction in mortality (aHR:0.45 0.520.59 , P < .001) compared to those who declined the same offer, especially among the highest MELD (35-40) candidates (aHR:0.10 0.240.55 , P = .001). Accepting an OLD offer provided substantial long-term survival benefit compared to waiting for a better organ offer, notably among candidates with MELD 35-40. Providers should consider these benefits as they evaluate OLD graft offers.

Graft Risk Index After Liver Transplant: Internal and External Validation of a New Spanish Indicator

OBJECTIVES

Scarcity of liver grafts has led to the use of marginal donors, consequently increasing the number of complications posttransplant. To prevent this situation, several indicators have been developed. However, important differences remain among countries. Here, we compared an early-risk liver transplant indicator based on the Spanish Liver Transplant Registry, called the Graft Risk Index, versus the US donor risk index and the Eurotransplant donor risk index.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The new indicator was based on prospectively collected data from 600 adult liver transplants performed in our center. We considered 2 events to compare the indexes: graft survival and rejection-free graft survival, with Cox proportional regression for analyses. Power to predict graft survival was evaluated by calculating the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve.

RESULTS

We found no differences between the US and Eurotransplant donor risk indexes in prediction of patients with and without early graft failure. With regard to early survival, only the Graft Risk Index allowed better survival discrimination, in which survival progressively decreased with values ≥ 3 (with probability of graft survival at 1 month of 68%; 95% confidence interval, 46.2-82.5). This increase in risk was significant compared with the standard group (hazard ratio of 10.15; 95% confidence interval, C 3.91- 26.32; P < .001). We calculated powers of prediction of 0.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.62), 0.54 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.65), and 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.77) for donor risk index, Eurotransplant donor risk index, and early Graft Risk Index, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the US donor risk index nor the Eurotransplant donor risk index was valid for our Spanish liver donation and transplant program. Therefore, an indicator to predict posttransplant graft survival that is adapted to our environment is necessary. This national Graft Risk Index can be a useful tool to optimize donor-recipient matching.

Assessment of Trends in Transplantation of Liver Grafts From Older Donors and Outcomes in Recipients of Liver Grafts From Older Donors, 2003-2016

Importance

In light of the growing population of older adults in the United States, older donors (aged ≥70 years) represent an expansion of the donor pool; however, their organs are underused. Liver grafts from older donors were historically associated with poor outcomes and higher discard rates, but clinical protocols, organ allocation, and the donor pool have changed in the past 15 years.

Objective

To evaluate trends in demographics, discard rates, and outcomes among older liver donors and transplant recipients of livers from older donors in a large national cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective cohort study of 4127 liver grafts from older donors and 3350 liver-only recipients of older donor grafts and 78 990 liver grafts from younger donors (aged 18-69 years) and 64 907 liver-only recipients of younger donor grafts between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2016, in the United States. The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, which includes data on all transplant recipients in the United States that are submitted by members of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, was used.

Exposures

Year of liver transplant and age of liver donor.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Odds of graft discard and posttransplant outcomes of all-cause graft loss and mortality.

Results

In this study, 4127 liver grafts from older donors were recovered for liver transplant across the study period (2003-2016); 747 liver grafts from older donors were discarded, and 3350 liver grafts from older donors were used for liver-only recipients. After adjusting for donor characteristics other than age and accounting for Organ Procurement Organization-level variation, liver grafts from older donors were more likely to be discarded compared with liver grafts from younger donors in 2003-2006 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.68-2.31), 2007-2009 (aOR, 2.55; 95% CI, 2.17-3.01), 2010-2013 (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.68-2.46), and 2013-2016 (aOR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.96-2.86) (P < .001 for all). Transplants of liver grafts from older donors represented a progressively lower proportion of all adult liver transplants, from 6.0% (n = 258 recipients) in 2003 to 3.2% (n = 211 recipients) in 2016 (P = .001). However, outcomes in recipients of grafts from older donors improved over time, with 40% lower graft loss risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.68; P < .001) and 41% lower mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.52-0.68; P < .001) in 2010 through 2016 vs 2003 through 2009; these results were beyond the general temporal improvements in graft loss (interaction P = .03) and mortality risk (interaction P = .04) among recipients of liver grafts from younger donors.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings show that from 2003 to 2016, liver graft loss and mortality among recipients of liver grafts from older donors improved; however, liver graft discard from older donors remained increased and the number of transplants performed with liver grafts from older donors decreased. Expansion of the donor pool through broader use of liver grafts from older donors might be reasonable.

Minimizing Risk Associated With Older Liver Donors by Matching to Preferred Recipients: A National Registry and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Allografts from older liver donors (OLDs), 70 years or older are often discarded for fear of inferior outcomes. We previously identified "preferred recipients" who did not suffer the higher risk of graft loss and mortality associated with OLDs. Preferred recipients were first-time, non-status 1 registrants older than 45 years, body mass index less than 35, indication other than hepatitis C, and cold ischemia time less than 8 hours.

METHODS

We assessed the validity of the preferred recipient construct in a larger, more recent cohort (38 891 patients, 2006-2013). We compared recipients of OLD grafts to recipients of average liver donors (ALDs, age = 40-69) and ideal liver donors (ILDs, age = 18-39) grafts using multilevel Cox regression adjusting for recipient and transplant factors.

RESULTS

The use of OLD grafts in preferred recipients has increased from 2006 to 2013 (P = 0.02). Preferred recipients Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores ranged 6 to 40. Preferred recipients had similar 5-year all-cause graft loss (ACGL) with OLD versus ALD and ILD grafts (25.4% vs 24.5% and 21.6%). Conversely, nonpreferred recipients had higher 5-year ACGL with OLD versus ALD and ILD grafts (41.4% vs 32.9% and 25.6%). After adjustment, preferred recipients had similar graft loss with OLD versus ALD grafts (hazard ratio [HR], 0.921.081.27; P = 0.3) and ILD grafts (HR, 0.981.161.39, P = 0.09); however, nonpreferred recipients had higher ACGL risk with OLD grafts versus ALD (HR, 1.281.411.56, P < 0.001) and ILD grafts (HR, 1.501.671.86, P < 0.001). Similar trends are seen with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Because preferred recipients comprise 43.3% (n = 2916) of the current waitlist and span the full range of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores, transplanted OLD allografts could be distributed without added risk of graft loss or mortality.

Age and liver transplantation

The average age of liver transplant donors and recipients has increased over the years. Independent of the cause of liver disease, older candidates have more comorbidities, higher waitlist mortality and higher post-transplant mortality than younger patients. However, transplant benefit may be similar in older and younger recipients, provided older recipients are carefully selected. The cohort of elderly patients transplanted decades ago is also increasingly raising issues concerning long-term exposure to immunosuppression and aging of the transplanted liver. Excellent results can be achieved with elderly donors and there is virtually no upper age limit for donors after brain death liver transplantation. The issue is how to optimise selection, procurement and matching to ensure good results with elderly donors. The impact of old donor age is more pronounced in younger recipients and patients with a high model for end-stage liver disease score. Age matching between the donor and the recipient should be incorporated into allocation policies with a multistep approach. However, age matching may vary depending on the objectives of different allocation policies. In addition, age matching must be revisited in the era of direct-acting antivirals. More restrictive limits have been adopted in donation after circulatory death. Perfusion machines which are currently under investigation may help expand these limits. In living donor liver transplantation, donor age limit is essentially guided by morbidity related to procurement. In this review we summarise changing trends in recipient and donor age. We discuss the implications of older age donors and recipients. We also consider different options for age matching in liver transplantation that could improve outcomes.

Age Matching of Elderly Liver Grafts With Elderly Recipients Does Not Have a Synergistic Effect on Long-term Outcomes When Both Are Carefully Selected

BACKGROUND

Older donors and recipients are increasingly considered for liver transplantation. Both donor and recipient age have a negative impact on outcomes. Large registry analyses show that older donors are frequently matched to older recipients. Whether age-related risks accumulate in a synergic negative effect on outcomes because of donor-recipient age matching is poorly understood.

METHODS

We investigated the impact of donor-recipient age interaction on patient and death-censored graft survival in multivariate Cox regressions in 849 transplants (January 2000 to December 2015).

RESULTS

Donors 70 years or older did not affect long-term patient or graft survival. Recipient age independently increased the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.05, P < 0.0001), but donor-recipient age interaction was noninfluential. The negative impact of recipient age on patient survival was significant as early as 6 months after transplantation (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; P = 0.00008). The adjusted risk of death was significant for patients aged 60 to 69 years (HR, 1.995; 95% CI, 1.40-2.85; P < 0.0001) and 70 years or older (HR, 2.001; 95% CI, 1.10-2.66; P = 0.04). In contrast, the risk of graft loss was not influenced by recipient age (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.996-1.04; P = 0.11) or age interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Older livers can be safely used in older recipients without jeopardizing graft and patient survival if other risk factors are minimized.

Pilot, Open, Randomized, Prospective Trial for Normothermic Machine Perfusion Evaluation in Liver Transplantation From Older Donors

Ex situ normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) might minimize ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI) of liver grafts. In this study, 20 primary liver transplantation recipients of older grafts (≥70 years) were randomized 1:1 to NMP or cold storage (CS) groups. The primary study endpoint was to evaluate graft and patient survival at 6 months posttransplantation. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate liver and bile duct biopsies; IRI by means of peak transaminases within 7 days after surgery; and incidence of biliary complications at month 6. Liver and bile duct biopsies were collected at bench surgery, end of ex situ NMP, and end of transplant surgery. Interleukin (IL) 6, IL10, and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) perfusate concentrations were tested during NMP. All grafts were successfully transplanted. Median (interquartile range) posttransplant aspartate aminotransferase peak was 709 (371-1575) IU/L for NMP and 574 (377-1162) IU/L for CS (P = 0.597). There was 1 hepatic artery thrombosis in the NMP group and 1 death in the CS group. In NMP, we observed high TNF-α perfusate levels, and these were inversely correlated with lactate (P < 0.001). Electron microscopy showed decreased mitochondrial volume density and steatosis and an increased volume density of autophagic vacuoles at the end of transplantation in NMP versus CS patients (P < 0.001). Use of NMP with older liver grafts is associated with histological evidence of reduced IRI, although the clinical benefit remains to be demonstrated.

Optimizing the Use of Geriatric Livers for Transplantation in the Eurotransplant Region

Acceptance criteria for liver allografts are ever more expanding because of a persisting wait-list mortality. Older livers are therefore offered and used more frequently for transplantation. This study aims to analyze the use and longterm outcome of these transplantations. Data were included on 17,811 first liver transplantations (LTs) and information on livers that were reported for allocation but not transplanted from 2000 to 2015 in the Eurotransplant (ET) region. Graft survival was defined as the period between transplantation and date of retransplantation or date of recipient death. In the study period, 2394 (13%) transplantations were performed with livers ≥70 years old. Graft survival was 74%, 57%, and 41% at 1-, 5-, and 10-year follow-up, respectively. A history of diabetes mellitus in the donor (hazard ratio [HR], 1.3; P = 0.01) and positive hepatitis C virus antibody in the recipient (HR, 1.5; P < 0.001) are specific risk factors for transplantations with livers ≥70 years old. Although donor age is associated with a linearly increasing risk of graft loss between 25 and 80 years old, no difference in graft survival could be observed when "preferred" recipients were transplanted with a liver <70 or ≥70 years old (HR 1.1; CI 0.92-1.23, P = 0.40) or with a donor <40 or ≥70 years old (HR 1.2; CI 0.96-1.37, P = 0.13). Utilization of reported livers ≥70 years old increased from 42% in 2000-2003 to 76% in 2013-2015 without a decrease in graft survival (P = 0.45). In conclusion, an important proportion of LTs in the ET region are performed with livers ≥70 years old. The risk of donor age on graft loss increases linearly between 25 and 80 years old. Livers ≥70 years old can, however, be transplanted safely in preferred patients and are to be used more frequently to further reduce wait-list mortality.

Orthotopic Liver Transplantation With Elderly Donors (Over 80 Years of Age): A Prospective Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Our main objective was to assess the clinical outcomes obtained in a single orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) hospital with donors ≥80 years of age compared to a control group of patients subjected to OLT during the same period of time with donors who were under 65 years of age.

METHODS

A prospective analysis was carried out on all the OLTs performed using liver grafts from donors in a state of brain death and with an age of ≥80 years (study group) between April 2007 and January 2015. The results of the study group (n = 36) were compared with those of a control group of patients less than 65 years of age receiving transplants with grafts.

RESULTS

A total of 51 potential donors ≥80 years were assessed, with a total of 36 liver transplants being carried out and their results were compared with a control group of 283 patients receiving transplants. The median follow-up time of the patients in the series was 36 months (range: 24-120 months). Graft survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 77%, 72%, and 62%, respectively, among the patients in the study group and 79%, 73%, and 65% among the patients in the control group, and there were no statistically significant differences. Patient survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 86%, 82%, and 75%, respectively, among the patients in the study group and 82%, 76%, and 72% among the patients in the control group, also without there being any statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no age limit for liver transplant donors. The use of octogenarian donors makes it possible to increase the pool of donors while providing enough safety for the recipient.

Clinical use of an immune monitoring panel in liver transplant recipients: A prospective, observational study

Immunosuppressive therapy greatly contributed to making liver transplantation the standard treatment for end-stage liver diseases. However, it remains difficult to predict and measure the efficacy of pharmacological immunosuppression. Therefore, we used a panel of standardized, commonly available, biomarkers with the aim to describe their changes in the first 3 weeks after the transplant procedure and assess if they may help therapeutic drug monitoring in better tailoring the dose of the immunosuppressive drugs. We prospectively studied 72 consecutive patients from the day of liver transplant (post-operative day #0) until the post-operative day #21. Leukocytes, neutrophils, lymphocytes (CD4+, CD8+), natural killer cells, monocytes, immunoglobulins and tacrolimus serum levels were measured on peripheral blood (at day 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 after surgery). Patients who developed infections showed significantly higher CD64+ monocytes on post operative day #7. IgG levels were lower on post operative day #3 among patients who later developed infections. We also found that a sharp decrease in IgA from post operative day #0 to 3 (-226 mg/dL in the ROC curve analysis) strongly correlates with the onset of infections among HCV- patients. No specific markers of rejection emerged from the tested panel of markers. Our results show that some early changes in peripheral blood white cells and immunoglobulins may predict the onset of infections and may be useful in modulating the immunosuppressive therapy. However, a panel of commonly available, standardized biomarkers do not support in improving therapeutic drug monitoring ability to individualize immunosuppressive drugs dosing.

Association between donor age and risk of graft failure after liver transplantation: an analysis of the Eurotransplant database

Grafts from elderly donors are increasingly used for liver transplantation. As of yet there is no published systematic data to guide the use of specific age cutoffs the effect of elderly donors on patient outcomes must be clarified. This study analyzed the Eurotransplant database (01/01/2000-31/07/2014; N = 26 294) out of whom 8341 liver transplantations were filtered to identify for this analysis. 2162 of the grafts came from donors >60 including 203 from octogenarians ≥80 years. Primary outcome was the risk of graft failure according to donor age using a confounder adjusted Cox-Regression model with frailty terms (or random effects). The proportion of elderly grafts increased during the study period [i.e., octogenarians 0.1% (n = 1) in 2000 to 3.4% (n = 45) in 2013]. Kaplan-Meier and Cox-analyses revealed a reduced survival and a higher risk for graft failure with increasing donor age. Although the age effect was allowed to vary non-linearly, a linear association hazard ratio (HR = 1.1 for a 10 year increase in donor age) was evident. The linearity of the association suggests that there is no particular age at which the effect increases more rapidly, providing no evidence for a cutoff age. In clinical practice, the combination of high donor age with HU-transplantations, hepatitis C, high MELD-scores and long cold ischemic time should be avoided.

Dual aortic and portal perfusion at procurement prevents ischaemic-type biliary lesions in liver transplantation when using octogenarian donors: a retrospective cohort study

Several risk factors for ischaemic-type biliary lesions (ITBL) after liver transplantation (LT) have been identified, but the role of portal vein perfusion at graft procurement is still unclear. This was a prospective study on double aortic and portal perfusion (DP) of liver grafts stratified by donor's decade (<60 yo; 60-69 yo; 70-79 yo and ≥80 yo) versus similar historical cohorts of primary, adult grafts procured with single aortic perfusion (SP) only. The primary study aim was to assess the role of DP on the incidence of ITBL. There was no difference in the incidence of overall biliary complications according to procurement technique for recipients of grafts <80 years. A higher incidence of ITBL was observed for patients receiving grafts ≥80 years and perfused through the aorta only (1.9 vs. 13.4%; P = 0.008). When analysing octogenarian grafts, donor male gender (HR = 6.4; P = 0.001), haemodynamic instability (HR = 4.9; P = 0.008), and type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) (HR = 3.0; P = 0.03) were all independent risk factors for ITBL, while double perfusion at procurement (HR = 0.1; P = 0.04) and longer donor intensive care unit (ICU) stay (HR = 0.7; P = 0.04) were protective factors. Dual aortic and portal perfusion has the potential to reduce post-transplant ITBL incidence for recipients of octogenarian donor grafts. Larger series are needed to confirm this preliminary experience.