Kidney utilization and outcomes of liver transplant recipients who were listed for kidney after liver transplant after the implementation of safety net policy

Improved outcomes of kidney after liver transplantation after the implementation of the safety net policy

The number of kidney after liver transplants (KALT) increased after the implementation of the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) safety net policy, but the effects of the policy on KALT outcomes remain unknown. Using the UNOS database, we identified KALT between 60 and 365 days from liver transplant from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020. The main outcome was 1- and 3-year patient, liver, and kidney graft survival. Secondary outcomes included 6-month and 1-year acute rejection (AR) of liver and kidney, and 1-year kidney allograft function. Of the 256 KALT, 90 were pre-policy and 166 post-policy. Compared to pre-policy, post-policy 1- and 3-year liver graft survival was higher (54% and 54% vs. 86% and 81%, respectively, p <0.001), while 1- and 3-year kidney graft survival (99% and 75% vs. 92% and 79%, respectively, p =0.19), and 1- and 3-year patient survival (99% and 99% vs. 95% and 89%, respectively, p =0.11) were not significantly different. Subgroup analysis revealed similar trends in patients with and without renal failure at liver transplant. Liver AR at 6 months was lower post-policy (6.3% vs. 18.3%, p =0.006) but was similar (10.5% vs. 13%, p =0.63) at 1 year. Kidney AR was unchanged post-policy at 6 months and 1 year. Creatinine at 1 year did not differ post-policy versus pre-policy (1.4 vs. 1.3 mg/dL, p =0.07) despite a higher proportion of deceased donors, higher Kidney Donor Profile Index, and longer kidney cold ischemia time post-policy ( p <0.05 for all). This 3-year follow-up after the 2017 UNOS policy revision demonstrated that the safety net implementation has resulted in improved liver outcomes for patients who underwent KALT with no increased AR of the liver or the kidney allografts.

Novel indications for referral and care for simultaneous liver kidney transplant recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Kidney dysfunction is challenging in liver transplant candidates to determine whether it is reversible or not. This review focuses on the pertinent data on how to best approach liver transplant candidates with kidney dysfunction in the current era after implementing the simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) allocation policy and safety net.

RECENT FINDINGS

The implementation of the SLK policy inverted the steady rise in SLK transplants and improved the utilization of high-quality kidneys. Access to kidney transplantation following liver transplant alone (LTA) increased with favorable outcomes. Estimating GFR in liver transplant candidates remains challenging, and innovative methods are needed. SLK provided superior patient and graft survival compared to LTA only for patients with advanced CKD and dialysis at least 3 months. SLK can provide immunological protection against kidney rejection in highly sensitized candidates. Post-SLK transplant care is complex, with an increased risk of complications and hospitalization.

SUMMARY

The SLK policy improved kidney access and utilization. Transplant centers are encouraged, under the safety net, to reserve SLK for liver transplant candidates with advanced CKD or dialysis at least 3 months while allowing lower thresholds for highly sensitized patients. Herein, we propose a practical approach to liver transplant candidates with kidney dysfunction.

Kidney after liver transplantation does not have an increased risk of rejection compared to liver alone

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) transplant protects against acute cellular rejection. In 2017, UNOS implemented a "safety net" policy to allow patients with renal recovery to avoid renal transplantation. Whether kidney after liver transplantation (KALT) increases the risk of rejection is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database of adult patients who received liver transplant, SLK or KALT between 2010 and 2020. We examined rejection of the liver within 6 months and 1 year of the liver transplant, as well as rejection of the kidney within 6 months and 1 year of receiving the kidney, as well as patient and graft loss.

RESULTS

Sixty-six thousand seventy-nine patients were transplanted; 60 168 with liver transplant alone, 5627 with SLK, and 284 with KALT. Acute or chronic liver rejection rates within 6 or 12 months were statistically higher in the KALT group (10.0% and 10.9%) compared to the SLK group (6.1% and 7.5%), but comparable to the LTA group (9.3% and 11.1%). Kidney rejection and graft survival rates were not different. Liver graft survival was worse in KALT than SLK or LTA (Kaplan-Meier estimates .61 vs. .89 and .90), but these patients were more ill at the time of transplantation. KDPI and LDRI scores were notably lower in the SLK than KALT group. Patient survival was not clinically different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

KALT does not increase the risk of acute or chronic kidney rejection. SLK has a lower risk of early liver rejection, but this effect diminishes by one year to being not clinically different compared to KALT. Given that KALT is immunologically safe, and potentially avoids unnecessary renal graft use, it should be preferred over SLK.

BRIEF SUMMARY

Patients undergoing sequential kidney after liver transplant do not have an increased risk of liver or kidney rejection when compared to liver transplant alone or simultaneous liver and kidney transplant.

Differential in Kidney Graft Years on the Basis of Solitary Kidney, Simultaneous Liver-Kidney, and Kidney-after-Liver Transplants

BACKGROUND

The number of simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplants has significantly increased in the United States. There has also been an increase in kidney-after-liver transplants associated with 2017 policy revisions aimed to fairly allocate kidneys after livers. SLK and kidney-after-liver candidates are prioritized in allocation policy for kidney offers ahead of kidney-alone candidates.

METHODS

We compared kidney graft outcomes of kidney-alone transplant recipients with SLK and kidney-after-liver transplants using paired kidney models to mitigate differences among donor risk factors. We evaluated recipient characteristics between transplant types and calculated differential graft years using restricted mean survival estimates.

RESULTS

We evaluated 3053 paired donors to kidney-alone and SLK recipients and 516 paired donors to kidney-alone and kidney-after-liver recipients from August 2017 to August 2022. Kidney-alone recipients were younger, more likely on dialysis, and Black race. One-year and 3-year post-transplant kidney graft survival for kidney-alone recipients was 94% and 86% versus SLK recipients 89% and 80%, respectively, P < 0.001. One-year and 3-year kidney graft survival for kidney-alone recipients was 94% and 84% versus kidney-after-liver recipients 93% and 87%, respectively, P = 0.53. The additional kidney graft years for kidney-alone versus SLK transplants was 21 graft years/100 transplants (SEM=5.0) within 4 years post-transplantation, with no significant difference between kidney-after-liver and kidney-alone transplants.

CONCLUSIONS

Over a 5-year period in the United States, SLK transplantation was associated with significantly lower kidney graft survival compared with paired kidney-alone transplants. Most differences in graft survival between SLK and kidney-alone transplants occurred within the first year post-transplantation. By contrast, kidney-after-liver transplants had comparable graft survival with paired kidney-alone transplants.

Simultaneous heart-kidney transplant in patients with borderline estimated glomerular filtration rate without dialysis dependency

BACKGROUND

Appropriate patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation (sHK) in patients with moderate renal dysfunction remains challenging.

METHODS

From the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2003-2020), we identified 5678 adults with an estimated pre-transplant glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and no pre-transplant dialysis. Patients undergoing sHK (n = 293) were compared with those undergoing heart transplantation alone (n = 5385) using 1:3 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The sHK utilization rate increased from 1.8% in 2003 to 12.2% in 2020 (p < .001). After matching, 1 and 5-year survival was 87.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.3-91.0) and 80.0% (95% CI 74.2-84.6) after sHK, and 87.3% (95% CI 85.2-89.1) and 71.8% (95% CI 68.4-74.9) after heart transplant alone (p = .04). In the subgroup analysis, sHK was associated with a 5-year survival benefit only in patients with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .05) but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .45). Patients who underwent heart transplants alone also had a higher incidence of becoming chronic dialysis-dependent after transplant within 5-year follow-up (10.2%, 95% CI 8.0-12.6 vs. 3.8%, 95% CI 1.7-7.1, p = .004). The 5-year incidence of subsequent kidney waitlisting and transplants after heart transplants alone was 5.6% and 1.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among propensity-matched patients without pre-transplant dialysis, compared to heart transplants alone, sHK had improved 5-year survival in those with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 . One-year survival was similar irrespective of eGFR. Receiving a kidney after a heart transplant alone is rare under the current allocation system.

Chronic Kidney Disease After Liver Transplantation

Chronic kidney disease among liver transplant recipients is common and associated with an increased mortality risk. Several risk factors and causes for the development of chronic kidney disease have been identified. They can be divided into perioperative factors, such as unresolved acute kidney injury; donor-related factors, such as the use of extended criteria liver allografts; and recipient-related factors, such as the use of calcineurin inhibitors and the presence of metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and obesity. There is a bimodal progression, more prominent during the initial post-transplant months, followed by a gradual but progressive decline over the subsequent years. Management strategies to prevent and treat chronic kidney disease in the general population can be reasonably applied to the liver transplant population and include addressing comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes. Strategies to minimize or withdraw calcineurin inhibitors from the immunosuppressive regimen can slow progression of kidney dysfunction. Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease should be considered for kidney transplantation due to its survival advantage. Allocation policy in the United States confers safety-net allocation priority for liver transplant recipients who develop advanced chronic kidney disease within the first year of liver transplantation.

Analysis of Native Kidney Function Recovery With Renal Scintigraphy Following Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) have impaired native kidney function. The relative contribution of allograft versus native function after SLK is unknown. We sought to characterize the return of native kidney function following SLK.

METHODS

Following SLK, patients underwent technetium-99 m-mercaptoacetyltriglycine renal scintigraphy following serum creatinine nadir. Kidney contributions to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were determined. Patients with native kidney function at serum creatinine nadir contributing eGFR ≥30 versus <30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 were compared, and multiple linear regression analysis for native eGFR improvement was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included in this analysis. Average native kidney contribution to overall kidney function following SLK was 51.1% corresponding to native kidney eGFR of 44.5 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and native kidney function eGFR improvement of 30.3 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ( P < 0.001). Twenty-six of 31 patients had native kidney contribution of eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . Hepatorenal syndrome as the sole primary etiology of kidney dysfunction was 100% specific for native kidney eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and predicted native eGFR improvement ( P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial improvement in native kidney function follows SLK, and hepatorenal syndrome as the sole primary etiology of kidney dysfunction is predictive of improvement. Whether such patients are suitable for liver transplant followed by surveillance with option for subsequent kidney transplants requires investigation.