Differential effects of donor age in liver transplant recipients infected with hepatitis B, hepatitis C and without viral hepatitis

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.

MSR1-dependent efferocytosis improved ischemia-reperfusion injury following aged-donor liver transplantation in mice by regulating the pro-resolving polarisation of macrophages

Compared with young liver donors, aged liver donors are more susceptible to ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) following transplantation, which may be related to excessive inflammatory response and macrophage dysfunction, but the specific mechanism is unclear. Macrophage scavenger receptor 1 (MSR1) is a member of the scavenger receptor family, and plays an important regulatory role in inflammation response and macrophage function regulation. But its role in IRI following aged-donor liver transplantation is still unclear. This study demonstrates that MSR1 expression is decreased in macrophages from aged donor livers, inhibiting their efferocytosis and pro-resolving polarisation. Decreased MSR1 is responsible for the more severe IRI suffered by aged donor livers. Overexpression of MSR1 using F4/80-labelled AAV9 improved intrahepatic macrophage efferocytosis and promoted pro-resolving polarisation, ultimately ameliorating IRI following aged-donor liver transplantation. In vitro co-culture experiments further showed that overexpression of MSR1 promoted an increase in calcium concentration, which further activated the PI3K-AKT-GSK3β pathway, and induced the upregulation of β-catenin. Overall, MSR1-dependent efferocytosis promoted the pro-resolving polarisation of macrophages through the PI3K-AKT-GSK3β pathway-induced up-regulating of β-catenin leading to improved IRI following aged-donor liver transplantation.

Reappraisal of Donor Age in Liver Transplantation: NASH as a Potential Target to Safely Utilize Old Liver Grafts

BACKGROUND

With the chronic shortage of donated organs, expanding the indications for liver transplantation (LT) from older donors is critical. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) stands out because of its unique systemic pathogenesis and high recurrence rate, both of which might make donor selection less decisive. The present study aims to investigate the usefulness of old donors in LT for NASH patients.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Scientific Registry Transplant Recipient database. The cohort was divided into 3 categories according to donor age: young (aged 16-35), middle-aged (36-59), and old donors (60-). Multivariable and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to compare the risk of donor age on graft survival (GS).

RESULTS

A total of 67 973 primary adult donation-after-brain-death LTs (2002-2016) were eligible for analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a reduced impact of donor age on GS for the NASH cohort (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.27), comparing old to middle-aged donors. If the cohort was limited to NASH recipients plus 1 of the following, recipient age ≥60, body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30, adjusted hazard ratios were even smaller (0.99 [0.84-1.15], 0.92 [0.75-1.13], or 1.04 [0.91-1.19], respectively). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant differences in overall GS between old- and middle-aged donors in these subgroups ( P = 0.86, 0.28, and 0.11, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor age was less influential for overall GS in NASH cohort. Remarkably, old donors were equivalent to middle-aged donors in subgroups of recipient age ≥60, recipient body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30.

Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil In De Novo Renal Transplantation in a Retrospective Cohort of Transplant Recipients in Colombia-Esmitren Study

BACKGROUND

To describe and establish the efficacy and safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil (Micoflavin) in patients with de novo renal transplantation during one-year post-transplant follow-up. As secondary objectives, the behavior of mycophenolic acid (MPA) C0 levels in this population, the relationship between MPA levels and renal function of the grafts, the incidence of acute rejection, and the incidence of adverse effects were evaluated.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients who received a first kidney transplant from a deceased donor between March 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, at the Alma Mater of Antioquia Hospital of the Antioquia's University, in Medellín, Colombia. MPA C0 levels were taken from the patients on days 15, 30, 90, 180, and 360 after the kidney transplantation.

RESULTS

Patients presented MPA therapeutic levels in the study. The average of the MPA levels in the population was 2.5 µg/mL, with an IQR of 2.13 to 3.32. There were 5 acute rejections (27%), but none of the patients with acute rejection presented subtherapeutic levels of mycophenolate. No significant relationship was observed between mycophenolic acid levels and rejection (P = .255). The patients who completed the study had no gastrointestinal intolerance to mycophenolate, cytomegalovirus infections, or significant hematological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

MMF (Micoflavin) maintained mycophenolic acid levels C0 within the therapeutic range, was well tolerated and without the presence of significant adverse events, and maintained stable renal function throughout the follow-up period in the population studied.

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 liver transplant outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: analysis of the SRTR database

Background

Donor age is an important predictor for liver transplant recipients. Studies have not fully explored its impact on transplant outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients as well as its involvement in tumor recurrence.

Methods

HCC patients who received liver transplants during 2010–2017 from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database were included. The recipients were divided into four groups based on donor age: I (≤ 34 years), II (35–49 years), III (50–64 years), and IV (≥ 65 years). Transplant outcomes, including the overall survival (OS), tumor recurrence, and risks, were evaluated.

Results

A total of 13,276 HCC recipients were included in this study. Statistical significant differences were observed in OS among the four groups. The best 5-year survival was 76.0% in group I, followed by 73.5% in group II, 72.8% in group III, and 69.2% in group IV (P < 0.001). However, the liver-specific survival did not differ among these groups (P = 0.260). Donor age was found to be the independent predictor of OS after adjusting for other variables (P < 0.001, ref. group I; 1.087 (0.979–1.208) for group II, P = 0.119; 1.124 (1.015–1.246) for group III, P = 0.025; 1.395 (1.215–1.602) for group IV, P < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, OS was significantly different in recipients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), but there was no significant difference for recipients with hepatitis B virus (HBV), alcoholic liver diseases and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The post-transplant cumulative tumor recurrence rates were similar among the four groups (P = 0.382).

Conclusions

Older donor age was associated with decreased OS but not liver-specific survival as well as post-transplant tumor recurrence in HCC recipients. Donor age also had different effects in patients with different underlying liver diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-021-01786-6.

Limited Sampling Strategy for Estimation of Mycophenolic Acid Exposure in Adult Chinese Heart Transplant Recipients

Background: With the increasing use of mycophenolic acid (MPA) formulations in organ transplantation, the need for personalized immunosuppressive therapy has become well recognized based on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for avoidance of drug-related toxicity while maintaining efficacy. Few studies have assessed area under the 12 h concentration-time curve of MPA (MPA-AUC_0–12h) in heart transplant recipients who received mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dispersible tablets (MMFdt). The aim of the study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of MMFdt combined with tacrolimus and further to develop a practical method for estimation of MPA-AUC_0–12h using a limited sampling strategy (LSS).

Methods: A prospective study in a single center was performed in patients who continuously administrated with MMFdt or MMF capsule (MMFc) for at least 7 days after cardiac transplantation from 2018 to 2020. A total of 48 Chinese adult heart transplant recipients were enrolled. Blood samples were collected before and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 h after MMF administration. The validated high-performance liquid chromatography combined with tandem mass spectrometry method was used to measure MPA concentrations. Non-compartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was applied to calculate the data obtained from individual recipients by WinNonlin. LSS models were developed for MPA-AUC_0–12h prediction with multivariate stepwise regression analysis.

Results: A large inter-individual variability was observed in AUC_0–12h, T_max, C_max, MRT_0–12h, t_1/2 and CL/F after multiple dosing of MMFdt. However, no significant differences were observed between main PK parameters of MMFdt and MMFc. The best estimation of MPA-AUC_0–12h was achieved with four points: MPA-AUC_0–12h = 8.424 + 0.781 × C_0.5 + 1.263 × C₂ + 1.660 × C₄ + 3.022 × C₆ (R² = 0.844). The mean prediction error (MPE) and mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) of MPA-AUC_0–12h were 2.09 ± 14.05% and 11.17 ± 8.52%, respectively. Both internal and external validations showed good applicability for four-point LSS equation.

Conclusion: The results provide strong evidence for the use of LSS model other than a single time-point concentration of MPA when performing TDM. A four-point LSS equation using the concentrations at 0.5, 2, 4, 6 h is recommended to estimate MPA-AUC_0–12h during early period after transplantation in Chinese adult heart transplant recipients receiving MMFdt or MMFc. However, proper internal and external validations with more patients should be conducted in the future.

Systematic Assessment of Safety Threshold for Donor Age in Cadaveric Liver Transplantation

Background: Donor age affects allograft quality and the prognosis of recipients after liver transplantation (LT). Clinicians have assessed the quality of grafts from older donors based on their appearance and texture, with no reliable quantitative evidence. Our study aimed to assess the quantitative impact of donor age on post-transplant outcomes and its safety threshold for LT, based on the published literature.

Methods: Relevant studies were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, and ISI Web of Science databases. Pooled dichotomous relative risks (RRs) were calculated using metan. Continuous RRs were calculated using a two-stage random-effects model.

Results: Eleven studies including 30,691 LT cases were included for further analysis. For categorical comparison, the RR of death within the first post-transplant year was significantly higher among patients who received grafts from older donors. Similarly, the RR of graft failure (GF) was increased within the 3 years after transplantation. For continuous comparison, advanced donor age affected transplant outcomes in a linear manner (P > 0.05). A 10-year increment in donor age was associated with RRs 1.10, 1.12, 1.15, 1.10, and 1.08 for 90-day, 180-day, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year patient mortality and 1.08, 1.06, 1.10, 1.11, and 1.12, for 90-day, 180-day, 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year GF, respectively (all P < 0.05). A spline model showed that transplants using grafts from donors <43 years old were not associated with age-related risks (P > 0.05). The risk of GF was increased in subgroups with fewer LT cases, longer cold ischemic time, fewer male donors, and recipients with viral hepatitis (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Donor age might affect post-LT outcomes in a dose-dependent manner. The safety threshold for donor age in terms of GF should be lowered to 43 years as an early warning for the guarantee of satisfactory outcomes. Clinicians should weigh the benefits against the risks carefully for patients receiving grafts from older donors. Further studies are warranted to investigate the mechanisms responsible for the relationship between donor age and graft quality.

Differential Influence of Donor Age Depending on the Indication for Liver Transplantation-A Collaborative Transplant Study Report

BACKGROUND

Despite steadily increasing donor age, there are no general guidelines for the use of organs from elderly donors in liver transplantation. This study focuses on identifying the recipients who are less affected from an old-donor organ graft and conversely in whom a rather unfavorable outcome is expected because of high donor age.

METHODS

Forty-eight thousand two hundred sixty-one adult liver transplantations, performed between 2000 and 2017 and reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The proportion of ≥65-year-old donors has risen to >33% in recent years. The donor age has an approximately linear influence on graft survival. On average, each year's rise in the donor age was associated with a 0.9% increase in the risk of graft loss (hazard ratio [HR], 1.009; P < 0.001). The impact of donor age was strong in patients with hepatitis C-related cirrhosis (HR, 1.013; P < 0.001), substantial in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis (HR, 1.007; P < 0.001) and rather weak in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 1.003; P = 0.038). The increase in the risk of graft loss per year rise in donor age was 1.4% for 18 to 49 year olds, 1.0% for middle-aged, and only 0.4% for ≥60-year-old recipients (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Consequently, older recipients and especially patients with hepatocellular carcinoma seem to be less affected by an increased donor age, whereas the donor age is an important factor in all other patient groups.

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.

Liver Grafts with Major Extended Donor Criteria May Expand the Organ Pool for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The major extended donor criteria (maEDC; steatosis >40%, age >65 years, and cold ischemia time >14 h) influence graft and patient outcomes after liver transplantation. Despite organ shortages, maEDC organs are often considered unsuitable for transplantation. We investigated the outcomes of maEDC organ liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Two hundred and sixty-four HCC liver transplant patients were eligible for analysis. Risk factor analysis was performed for early allograft dysfunction; primary nonfunction; 30-day and 90-day graft failure; and 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year patient mortality. One-year graft survival was higher in recipients of no-maEDC grafts. One-year patient survival did not differ between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs. The univariate and multivariate analyses revealed no association between maEDC grafts and one-year patient mortality. Graft survival differed between the recipients of no-maEDC and maEDC organs after correcting for a laboratory model of end-stage liver disease (labMELD) score with a cut-off value of 20, but patient survival did not. Patient survival did not differ between recipients who did and did not meet the Milan criteria and who received grafts with and without maEDC. Instead of being discarded, maEDC grafts may expand the organ pool for patients with HCC without impairing patient survival or recurrence-free survival.

Impact of Donor Age on Recipient Survival in Adult-to-Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of donor age on recipient outcome after living-donor partial liver transplantation (LDLT).

BACKGROUND

Donor age is a well-known prognostic factor in deceased donor liver transplantation; however, its role in LDLT remains unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 315 consecutive cases of primary adult-to-adult LDLT in our center between April 2006 and March 2014. Recipients were divided into 5 groups according to the donor age: D-20s (n = 60); D-30s (n = 72); D-40s (n = 57); D-50s (n = 94); and D-60s (n = 32). The recipient survival and the association with various clinical factors were investigated.

RESULTS

Recipient survival proportions were significantly higher in D-20s compared with all the other groups (P = 0.008, < 0.001, < 0.001, and = 0.006, vs D-30s, -40s, -50s, and -60s, respectively), whereas there was no association between recipient survival and their own age. There are 3 typical relationships between donors and recipients in adult-to-adult LDLT: from child-to-parent, between spouses/siblings, and from parent-to-child. The overall survival in child-to-parent was significantly higher than in spouses/siblings (P = 0.002) and in parent-to-child (P = 0.005), despite significantly higher recipient age in child-to-parent [59 (42-69) years, P < 0.001]. Contrastingly, parent-to-child exhibited the lowest survival, despite the youngest recipient age [26 (20-43) years, P < 0.001]. In addition, younger donor age exhibited significantly better recipient survival both in hepatitis C virus-related and in non-hepatitis C virus diseases. Univariate and multivariate analyses both demonstrated that donor age and graft-type (right-sided livers) are independent prognostic factors for recipient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Donor age is an independent, strong prognostic factor in adult-to-adult LDLT.

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.

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.

Recipient Outcomes with Younger Donors Undergoing Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Introduction

The impact of donor age on liver transplantation is well known. Data on an appropriate donor age cut-off for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with a background of hepatitis C (HCV) is generally limited. The objective of this study was to determine whether limiting donor age to less than 35 years improved outcomes in patients with HCV-related end-stage liver disease (ESLD).

Methods

This was a retrospective review of 169 patients who underwent LDLT for HCV-related ESLD. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received grafts from donors ≤ 35 (Group 1) or > 35 (Group 2) years of age. Kaplan Meier curves were used to determine survival. Uni and multivariate analysis were performed to determine independent predictors of mortality.

Results

Mean donor age was 25.1 ± 5.2 and 40.1 ± 3.4 years (P < 0.0001). Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) was seen in 11.7% patients in Group 1 versus 29.6% in Group 2 (P = 0.02). A significant difference in mortality was present between the two groups, i.e., 33.3% versus 15.8% (P = 0.04). The estimated four-year overall survival (OS) was 78% and 64% (P = 0.03). Upon doing univariate analysis, the donor age (P = 0.04) and EAD (P = 0.006) were found to be significant variables for mortality. On multivariate analysis, EAD was the only independent predictor of mortality (Hazard ratio: 2.6; confidence interval: 1.1 - 5.8; P = 0.01).

Conclusion

Opting for younger donors (≤ 35 years) for HCV-related ESLD patients lowers the risk of EAD and improves overall survival.

Infections in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation has become an important treatment modality for patients with end-stage liver disease/cirrhosis, acute liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Although surgical techniques and immunosuppressive regimens for liver transplantation have improved significantly over the past 20 years, infectious complications continue to contribute to the morbidity and mortality in this patient population. The use of standardized screening protocols for both donors and recipients, coupled with targeted prophylaxis against specific pathogens, has helped to mitigate the risk of infection in liver transplant recipients. Patients with chronic liver disease and cirrhosis have immunological deficits that place them at increased risk for infection while awaiting liver transplantation. The patient undergoing liver transplantation is prone to develop healthcare-acquired infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms that could potentially affect patient outcomes after transplantation. The complex nature of liver transplant surgery that involves multiple vascular and hepatobiliary anastomoses further increases the risk of infection after liver transplantation. During the early post-transplantation period, healthcare-acquired bacterial and fungal infections are the most common types of infection encountered in liver transplant recipients. The period of maximal immunosuppression that occurs at 1–6 months after transplantation can be complicated by opportunistic infections due to both primary infection and reactivation of latent infection. Severe community-acquired infections can complicate the course of liver transplantation beyond 12 months after transplant surgery. This chapter provides an overview of liver transplantation including indications, donor-recipient selection criteria, surgical procedures, and immunosuppressive therapies. A focus on infections in patients with chronic liver disease/cirrhosis and an overview of the specific infectious complications in liver transplant recipients are presented.

Analyzing predictors of graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation with donors aged 70 years and over

AIM

To increase the number of available grafts.

METHODS

This is a single-center comparative analysis performed between April 1986 and May 2016. Two hundred and twelve liver transplantation (LT) were performed with donors ≥ 70 years old (study group). Then, we selected the first cases that were performed with donors < 70 years old immediately after the ones that were performed with donors ≥ 70 years old (control group).

RESULTS

Graft and patient survivals were similar between both groups without increasing the risk of complications, especially primary non-function, vascular complications and biliary complications. We identified 5 risk factors as independent predictors of graft survival: recipient hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positivity [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.55-3.56; P = 0.00]; recipient age (HR = 1.04; 95%CI: 1.02-1.06; P = 0.00); donor age X model for end-stage liver disease (D-MELD) (HR = 1.00; 95%CI: 1.00-1.00; P = 0.00); donor value of serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (HR = 1.00; 95%CI: 1.00-1.00; P = 0.00); and donor value of serum sodium (HR = 0.96; 95%CI: 0.94-0.99; P = 0.00). After combining D-MELD and recipient age we obtained a new scoring system that we called DR-MELD (donor age X recipient age X MELD). Graft survival significantly decreased in patients with a DR-MELD score ≥ 75000, especially in HCV patients (77% vs 63% at 5 years in HCV-negative patients, P = 0.00; and 61% vs 25% at 5 years in HCV-positive patients; P = 0.00).

CONCLUSION

A DR-MELD ≥ 75000 must be avoided in order to obtain the best results in LT with donors ≥ 70 years old.

Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Aged Livers-The Energy Metabolism, Inflammatory Response, and Autophagy

Because of the lack of adequate organs, the number of patients with end-stage liver diseases, acute liver failure or hepatic malignancies waiting for liver transplantation is constantly increasing. Accepting aged liver grafts is one of the strategies expanding the donor pool to ease the discrepancy between the growing demand and the limited supply of donor organs. However, recipients of organs from old donors may show an increased posttransplantation morbidity and mortality due to enhanced ischemia-reperfusion injury. Energy metabolism, inflammatory response, and autophagy are 3 critical processes which are involved in the aging progress as well as in hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury. Compared with young liver grafts, impairment of energy metabolism in aged liver grafts leads to lower adenosine triphosphate production and an enhanced generation of free radicals, both aggravating the inflammatory response. The aggravated inflammatory response determines the extent of hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury and augments the liver damage. Autophagy protects cells by removal of damaged organelles, including dysfunctional mitochondria, a process impaired in aging and involved in ischemia-reperfusion-related apoptotic cell death. Furthermore, autophagic degradation of cellular compounds relieves intracellular adenosine triphosphate level for the energy depressed cells. Strategies targeting the mechanisms involved in energy metabolism, inflammatory response, and autophagy might be especially useful to prevent the increased risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury in aged livers after major hepatic surgery.

Live donor liver transplantation with older donors: Increased long-term graft loss due to HCV recurrence

Using our prospectively collected database all adult hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive patients receiving an adult-to-adult LDLT between October 2000 and May 2014 were identified. Outcome of LDLT with grafts from younger (<50 years=128) vs older donors (≥50 years=31) was compared. Post-transplant graft function, postoperative complications and incidence of HCV recurrence were evaluated. Long-term graft and patient survival was calculated. No difference in graft function was observed between younger and older grafts. Overall complications were similar between both groups. The severity of complications determined by the Dindo-Clavien score was similar. Graft loss from HCV recurrence was significantly less frequent in younger grafts (18% vs 62%, P = 0.001). Young vs older livers had a trend toward improved 1-, 5-, and 10-year graft survival (89% vs 87%, 77% vs 69%, 70% vs 55%, P = 0.096), while patient survival was comparable between both groups (91% vs 90%, 78% vs 69%, 71% vs 60%, P = 0.25). In conclusion, LDLT with older vs younger grafts are more frequently associated with long-term graft loss due to HCV recurrence. Differences in graft survival might be more prominent with prolonged (≥5-year) follow-up. Living donor-recipient matching is particularly important for younger HCV-positive recipients.

Hepatitis C Virus Infection in the Older Patient

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the most common blood-borne infection in the United States and is of concern in older adults. HCV infection is associated with not only hepatic but also extrahepatic comorbidities common to the aging patient including diabetes, kidney and cardiovascular diseases, and neurocognitive impairment. The effect of direct-acting antiviral agents to treat HCV on these outcomes is limited. This article summarizes the literature regarding the epidemiology and natural history of HCV infection; the impact of age on clinical outcomes in HCV-infected persons; and current knowledge regarding safety and efficacy of HCV treatment regimens in the older patient.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation in South Asia: Single Center Experience on Intermediate-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is paucity of data on intermediate-term post liver transplant outcomes from South Asia. The objective of this study was to determine survival outcomes in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in a busy liver transplant center in Pakistan.

METHODS

This study was a review of patients who underwent LDLT between 2012 and 2016. A total of 321 patients were included in this study. Early (within 90 days) and late (>90 days) morbidity and mortality was assessed. Estimated 1- and 4-year survival was determined.

RESULTS

Median age was 48 (18-73) years. Male to female ratio was 4.5:1. Out of total 346 complications, 184 (57.3%) patients developed 276 (79.7%) complications in early post-transplant period, whereas there were 70 (21.3%) late complications. Most common early complication was pleural effusion in 46 (16.6%) patients. Biliary complications were the most common late complication and were seen in 31/70 (44.2%) patients. Overall 21.4% patients had a biliary complication. The 3-month mortality was 14%. The estimated 1- and 4-year OS for a MELD cutoff of 30 was 84.5 versus 72 and 80 versus 57% (P = 0.01). There was no donor mortality.

CONCLUSION

Acceptable intermediate-term post-transplant outcomes were achieved with LDLT. There is a need to improve outcomes in high-MELD patients.

Increased survival in hepatitis c patients who underwent living donor liver transplant: a case-control study with propensity score matching

Purpose

There is no consensus regarding the difference in outcomes of HCV in patients who receive living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aims of this study were to compare characteristics between LDLT and DDLT groups and to identify risk factors affecting patient survival.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the multicenter records of 192 HCV RNA-positive patients who underwent liver transplantation.

Results

Thirty-five patients underwent DDLT, and 146 underwent LDLT. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival rates were 66.7%, 63.0%, and 63.0% in the DDLT group and 86.1%, 82.3%, and 79.5% in the LDLT group (P = 0.024), respectively. After propensity matching, the patient survival curve of the LDLT group was higher than that of the DDLT group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in patient survival between the 2 groups (P = 0.061). Recipient age ≥ 60 years, LDLT, and use of tacrolimus were positively associated with patient survival in multivariate analyses.

Conclusion

LDLT appears to be suitable for HCV-infected patients if appropriate living donor is available.

The donor risk index: A decade of experience

In 2006, derivation of the donor risk index (DRI) highlighted the importance of donor factors for successful liver transplantation. Over the last decade, the DRI has served as a useful metric of donor quality and has enhanced our understanding of donor factors and their impact upon recipients with hepatitis C virus, those with low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, and individuals undergoing retransplantation. DRI has provided the transplant community with a common language for describing donor organ characteristics and has served as the foundation for several tools for organ risk assessment. It is a useful tool in assessing the interactions of donor factors with recipient factors and their impact on posttransplant outcomes. However, limitations of statistical modeling, choice of donor factors, exclusion of unaccounted donor and geographic factors, and the changing face of the liver transplant recipient have tempered its widespread use. In addition, the DRI was derived from data before the MELD era but is currently being applied to expand the donor pool while concurrently meeting the demands of a dynamic allocation system. A decade after its introduction, DRI remains relevant but may benefit from being updated to provide guidance in the use of extended criteria donors by accounting for the impact of geography and unmeasured donor characteristics. DRI could be better adapted for recipients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by examining and including recipient factors unique to this population. Liver Transplantation 23 1216-1225 2017 AASLD.

Predictors of Poor Prognosis in Recurrent Hepatitis C After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a common indication for liver transplantation (LT). Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence is universal in viremic patients. This recurrence is frequently very aggressive, with graft loss in less than 5 years. Our aim is to detect which factors are related to worse fibrosis at 1 year post-LT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Records of all HCV-positive transplanted patients in Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria from 1996 to 2014 were collected. The variables analyzed were donor and recipient age and gender, hypertension, diabetes, viral genotype, viral load at LT, hepatocellular carcinoma in the explant, anticoagulation or antiplatelet treatment, year of transplantation, and mean levels of tacrolimus in the first month. Severe recurrence was defined as fibrosis F3 by biopsy, liver stiffness > 9.5 kPa by transient elastography, or hepatic venous pressure gradient > 5 mm Hg at 1 year post-LT. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

From a sample of 112 patients, 88 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean recipient age was 52.8 ± 8.0 years and 70.5% were men. Mean donor age was 46.4 ± 16.1 years and 59.1% were men. Severe recurrence occurred in 23.9%. Univariate analyses showed 3 variables were statistically significant: donor age (P = .03), recipient age (P = .008), and presence of hepatocellular carcinoma (P = .01). Only the 2 first variables remained significant in the multivariate model (P = .009 and P = .044 respectively). Hepatocellular carcinoma was probably related to older recipients becoming a confounding factor.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, donor and recipient age both conferred a worse prognosis in terms of fibrosis progression in patients with liver transplant due to HCV.

Extended Criteria Donors in Liver Transplantation

Mortality rates on the liver transplant waiting list are increasing. The shortage of organs has resulted in higher utilization of extended criteria donors (ECDs), with centers pushing the limits of what is acceptable for transplantation. Donor quality is more appropriately represented as a continuum of risk, and careful selection and matching of ECD grafts with recipients may lead to excellent outcomes. Although there is no precise definition for what constitutes an ECD liver, this review focuses on frequently cited characteristics, including donor age, steatosis, donation after cardiac death, and donors with increased risk of disease transmission.

Potential Liver Transplant Recipients with Hepatitis C: Should They Be Treated Before or After Transplantation?

Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) with newer directly acting antivirals (DAAs) and lead to sustained viral response (SVR) in majority of patients and SVR has been documented to be associated with reversal of liver cirrhosis. The improved SVR rates and safety profiles of DAAs have led to the treatment of patients with decompensated cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT). Several clinical trials of DAAs in decompensated HCV patients have recently demonstrated SVR rates above 80%, which have been associated with significant improvements, in the Child-Pugh-Turcotte scores/or model for end-stage liver disease scores in a proportion of patients. Moreover, it has been shown that HCV RNA becomes negative after 2-4 weeks of treatment, and those who are transplanted after becoming HCV RNA negative will be have very low the risk of HCV recurrence after transplantation. Some of the patients may have reached the "point of no return" and may proceed to worsening of decomposition over time. To avoid the risk of worsening, there is an additional option of treating these patients after LT should they develop recurrent HCV infection. Currently there are no guidelines as to select patients who would benefit from treatment prior to LT as opposed to those who will be better off being treated after the transplant surgery. The article discusses a possible approach for such selection.

Extended-criteria donors in liver transplantation Part II: reviewing the impact of extended-criteria donors on the complications and outcomes of liver transplantation

Extended-criteria donors (ECDs) have an impact on early allograft dysfunction (EAD), biliary complications, relapse of hepatitis C virus (HCV), and survivals. Early allograft dysfunction was frequently seen in grafts with moderate and severe steatosis. Donors after cardiac death (DCD) have been associated with higher rates of graft failure and biliary complications compared to donors after brain death. Extended warm ischemia, reperfusion injury and endothelial activation trigger a cascade, leading to microvascular thrombosis, resulting in biliary necrosis, cholangitis, and graft failure. The risk of HCV recurrence increased by donor age, and associated with using moderately and severely steatotic grafts. With the administration of protease inhibitors sustained virological response was achieved in majority of the patients. Donor risk index and EC donor scores (DS) are reported to be useful, to assess the outcome. The 1-year survival rates were 87% and 40% respectively, for donors with a DS of 0 and 3. Graft survival was excellent up to a DS of 2, however a DS >2 should be avoided in higher-risk recipients. The 1, 3 and 5-year survival of DCD recipients was comparable to optimal donors. However ECDs had minor survival means of 85%, 78.6%, and 72.3%. The graft survival of split liver transplantation (SLT) was comparable to that of whole liver orthotopic liver transplantation. SLT was not regarded as an ECD factor in the MELD era any more. Full-right-full-left split liver transplantation has a significant advantage to extend the high quality donor pool. Hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion can be applied clinically in DCD liver grafts. Feasibility and safety were confirmed. Reperfusion injury was also rare in machine perfused DCD livers.

How important is donor age in liver transplantation?

The age of liver donors has been increasing in the past several years because of a donor shortage. In the United States, 33% of donors are age 50 years or older, as are more than 50% in some European countries. The impact of donor age on liver transplantation (LT) has been analyzed in several studies with contradictory conclusions. Nevertheless, recent analyses of the largest databases demonstrate that having an older donor is a risk factor for graft failure. Donor age is included as a risk factor in the more relevant graft survival scores, such as the Donor Risk Index, donor age and Model for End-stage Liver Disease, Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation, and the Balance of Risk. The use of old donors is related to an increased rate of biliary complications and hepatitis C virus-related graft failure. Although liver function does not seem to be significantly affected by age, the incidence of several liver diseases increases with age, and the capacity of the liver to manage or overcome liver diseases or external injuries decreases. In this paper, the importance of age in LT outcomes, the role of donor age as a risk factor, and the influence of aging on liver regeneration are reviewed.

Severe alcoholic relapse after liver transplantation: What consequences on the graft? A study based on liver biopsies analysis

Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is a major indication for liver transplantation (LT), but up to 20% of patients experience severe alcoholic relapse. The aims of this study were to evaluate the impact of severe alcoholic relapse on the graft (based on histological examination) and to identify predictive factors associated with recurrent alcoholic cirrhosis (RAC). From 1990 to 2010, 369 patients underwent LT for ALD at Edouard Herriot Hospital (Lyon, France) and survived more than 1 year. All patients who presented severe alcoholic relapse and histological follow-up were included. Liver biopsies were performed at 1 and 5 years and at every 5 years after LT, and when clinically indicated. The median follow-up after LT was 11 years (range, 3-18 years). Severe alcoholic relapse was observed in 73 (20%) of the 369 patients, from whom 56 patients with histological evaluation were included. RAC was diagnosed in 18 (32%) of the 56 patients included, which represents 5% of the 369 patients transplanted for ALD. The median delay between LT and RAC was 6 years (range, 3-10 years) and 4.5 years (range, 2-8 years) after severe alcoholic relapse. The median cumulated years of alcohol use before RAC was 3.5 years (range, 2-7 years). The cumulative risk for F4 fibrosis was 15% at 3 years, 32% at 5 years, and 54% at 10 years after severe alcoholic relapse. A young age at LT (≤50 years old) and an early onset of heavy drinking (within the first 3 years after LT) were associated with RAC. In conclusion, severe alcoholic relapse usually occurs in the first years after LT and is responsible for accelerated severe graft injury. Liver Transplantation 22 773-784 2016 AASLD.

Donor Factors Including Donor Risk Index Predict Fibrosis Progression, Allograft Loss, and Patient Survival following Liver Transplantation for Hepatitis C Virus

BACKGROUND

The utilization of liver transplantation (LT) is limited by the availability of suitable organs. This study aimed to assess the impact of the donor risk index (DRI) and other donor characteristics on fibrosis progression, graft, and patient survival in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected LT recipients.

METHODS

HCV-infected LT recipients who had at least 2 post-LT protocol liver biopsy specimens available were included. Hazard ratio for bivariate analysis was computed using Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 312 recipients, 26.6% died over a median follow-up of 58.5 months (95% CI: 46.5-67.3). Fourteen patients underwent re-transplantation. Mean time to graft failure was 84.3 months, median follow-up: 59 months, 95% CI (48.2, 68.3). DRI >1.5 was significantly associated with patient and graft survival (P = 0.04). Of the subset of 104 individuals who underwent histological analysis, 67.3% progressed to ≥F2. On multivariate analysis, significant donor-specific predictors of fibrosis progression were: donor age >50 years and DRI >1.7.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Fibrosis progression in HCV-infected LT recipients is strongly associated with donor characteristics, specifically donor age and DRI. (2) DRI, an objective measure of donor quality, appears to correlate both with rate of histological progression and overall patient/graft survival.

Analysis of Post-Liver Transplant Hepatitis C Virus Recurrence Using Serial Cluster of Differentiation Antibody Microarrays

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection of the liver allograft after transplantation is universal, with some individuals suffering severe disease recurrence. Predictive markers of recurrent disease severity are urgently needed. In this study, we used a cluster of differentiation (CD) microarray to predict the severity of HCV recurrence after transplantation.

METHODS

The CD antibody microarray assays of live leukocytes were performed on peripheral blood taken in the first year after transplantation. The results were grouped into phases defined as; Pre-transplant (day 0), Early (day 3 to week 2), Mid (week 4 to week 10), and Late (week 12 to week 26). Hepatitis C virus severity was based on fibrosis stages in the first 2 years (F0-1 mild and F2-4 severe).

RESULTS

Serial blood samples from 16 patients were taken before and after liver transplantation. A total of 98 assays were performed. Follow-up was 3 years or longer. Comparing recurrence severity, significantly greater numbers of CD antigens were differentially expressed on the pretransplant samples compared to any posttransplant timepoints. Five differentially expressed CD antigens before transplantation (CD27 PH, CD182, CD260, CD41, and CD34) were significantly expressed comparing severe to mild recurrence, whereas expression of only CD152 was significant in the late phase after transplantation. No relationship was observed between the donor or recipient interleukin-28B genotypes and HCV recurrence severity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that circulating leukocyte CD antigen expression has utility in assessing recurrent HCV disease severity after liver transplantation and serves as a proof of principle. Importantly, pretransplant CD antigen expression is most predictive of disease outcome.

The corrected donor age for hepatitis C virus-infected liver transplant recipients

Donor age has become the dominant donor factor used to predict graft failure (GF) after liver transplantation (LT) in hepatitis C virus (HCV) recipients. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a model of corrected donor age (CDA) for HCV LT recipients that transforms the risk of other donor factors into the scale of donor age. We analyzed all first LT recipients with HCV in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) registry from January 1998 to December 2007 (development cohort, n = 14,538) and January 2008 to December 2011 (validation cohort, n = 7502) using Cox regression, excluding early GF (<90 days from LT). Accuracy in predicting 1 year GF (death or repeat LT) was assessed with the net reclassification index (NRI). In the development cohort, after controlling for pre-LT recipient factors and geotemporal trends (UNOS region, LT year), the following donor factors were independent predictors of GF, all P < 0.05: donor age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02/year), donation after cardiac death (DCD; HR, 1.31), diabetes (HR, 1.23), height < 160 cm (HR, 1.13), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≥ 120 U/L (HR, 1.10), female (HR, 0.94), cold ischemia time (CIT; HR, 1.02/hour), and non-African American (non-AA) donor-African American (AA) recipient (HR, 1.65). Transforming these risk factors into the donor age scale yielded the following: DCD = +16 years; diabetes = +12 years; height < 160 cm = +7 years; AST ≥ 120 U/L = +5 years; female = -4 years; and CIT = +1 year/hour > 8 hours and -1 year/hour < 8 hours. There was a large effect of donor-recipient race combinations: +29 years for non-AA donor and an AA recipient but only +5 years for an AA donor and an AA recipient, and -2 years for an AA donor and a non-AA recipient. In a validation cohort, CDA better classified risk of 1-year GF versus actual age (NRI, 4.9%; P = 0.009) and versus the donor risk index (9.0%, P < 0.001). The CDA, compared to actual donor age, provides an intuitive and superior estimation of graft quality for HCV-positive LT recipients because it incorporates additional factors that impact LT GF rates.

Hepatitis C treatment in liver transplant setting

Watch a video presentation of this article

Watch the interview with the author

Answer questions and earn CME

Hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation: a 10-year evaluation

AIM

To evaluate the predictors of 10-year survival of patients with hepatitis C recurrence.

METHODS

Data from 358 patients transplanted between 1989 and 2010 in two Italian transplant centers and with evidence of hepatitis C recurrence were analyzed. A χ(2), Fisher's exact test and Kruskal Wallis' test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Survival analysis was performed at 10 years after transplant using the Kaplan-Meier method, and a log-rank test was used to compare groups. A P level less than 0.05 was considered significant for all tests. Multivariate analysis of the predictive role of different variables on 10-year survival was performed by a stepwise Cox logistic regression.

RESULTS

The ten-year survival of the entire population was 61.2%. Five groups of patients were identified according to the virological response or lack of a response to antiviral treatment and, among those who were not treated, according to the clinical status (mild hepatitis C recurrence, "too sick to be treated" and patients with comorbidities contraindicating the treatment). While the 10-year survival of treated and untreated patients was not different (59.1% vs 64.7%, P = 0.192), patients with a sustained virological response had a higher 10-year survival rate than both the "non-responders" (84.7% vs 39.8%, P < 0.0001) and too sick to be treated (84.7% vs 0%, P < 0.0001). Sustained virological responders had a survival rate comparable to patients untreated with mild recurrence (84.7% vs 89.3%). A sustained virological response and young donor age were independent predictors of 10-year survival.

CONCLUSION

Sustained virological response significantly increased long-term survival. Awaiting the interferon-free regimen global availability, antiviral treatment might be questionable in selected subjects with mild hepatitis C recurrence.

Recurrent HCV after liver transplantation-mechanisms, assessment and therapy

Chronic HCV infection is the leading indication for liver transplantation. However, as a result of HCV recurrence, patient and graft survival after liver transplantation are inferior compared with other indications for transplantation. HCV recurrence after liver transplantation is associated with considerable mortality and morbidity. The development of HCV-related fibrosis is accelerated after liver transplantation, which is influenced by a combination of factors related to the virus, donor, recipient, surgery and immunosuppression. Successful antiviral therapy is the only treatment that can attenuate fibrosis. The advent of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has changed the therapeutic landscape for the treatment of patients with HCV. DAAs have improved tolerability, and can potentially be used without PEG-IFN for a shorter time than previous therapies, which should result in better outcomes. In this Review, we describe the important risk factors that influence HCV recurrence after liver transplantation, highlighting the mechanisms of fibrosis and the integral role of hepatic stellate cells. Indirect and direct assessment of fibrosis, in addition to new antiviral therapies, are also discussed.

Restricting liver transplant recipients to younger donors does not increase the wait-list time or the dropout rate: the hepatitis C experience

Older donor age is associated with lower graft and patient survival among all recipients of liver transplantation (LT). Among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), donor age is one of the strongest predictors of fibrosis severity and graft loss. We evaluated the implementation of a donor age restriction policy for LT patients with HCV at a single center and the effects that this policy had on wait-list (WL) and post-LT outcomes for HCV and non-HCV patients. This was a cohort study of 2388 WL patients and 1015 LT recipients between March 2002 and January 2013 and reflected 3 different eras of donor age policies. With the donor age restriction, the median donor age was reduced in LT recipients with HCV versus LT recipients without HCV (30 versus 48 years, P < 0.001) without differences in the WL time (10.6 versus 8.0 months, P = 0.23). According to a competing risks regression, those with HCV and those without HCV had lower subhazard ratios (SHRs) of dropout or death on the WL during the donor age restriction era versus the era without donor age restriction [SHR = 0.68 (P < 0.01) and SHR = 0.64 (P = 0.01), respectively]. No differences were seen in early post-LT survival for patients with or without HCV between eras (P = 0.7 and P = 0.88, respectively). In conclusion, we show that donor age restriction for HCV results in a lower donor age for HCV recipients without obvious adverse WL consequences. Although additional studies are needed, our results demonstrate the feasibility of donor age restriction for LT recipients with HCV, and such information may be relevant to programs with limited access to new antiviral therapies for which modifying the risk of severe disease remains of paramount importance.

D-MELD risk capping improves post-transplant and overall mortality under markov microsimulation

AIM: To hypothesize that the product of calculated Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score excluding exception points and donor age (D-MELD) risk capping ± Rule 14 could improve post liver transplant and overall survival after listing.

METHODS: Probabilities derived from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2002 and 2004 were used to simulate potential outcomes for all patients listed for transplantation. The Markov simulation was then modified by screening matches using a 1200 or 1600 D-MELD risk cap ± allowing transplants for Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≤ 14 (Rule 14). The differential impact of the rule changes was assessed.

RESULTS: The Markov simulation accurately reproduced overall and post transplant survival. A 1200 D-MELD risk cap improved post-transplant survival. Both the 1200 and 1600 risk caps improved overall survival for waitlisted patients. The addition of Rule 14 further improved post transplant and overall survival by redistribution of donor livers to recipients in higher MELD subgroups. The mechanism for improved overall and post-transplant survival after listing was due to shifting a larger percentage of transplants to the moderate MELD score subgroup (MELD 15-29) while also ensuring that high MELD recipients have livers of high quality to achieve excellent post transplant survival.

CONCLUSION: A 1200 D-MELD risk cap + Rule 14 provided the greatest overall benefit primarily by focusing liver transplantation towards the moderate MELD recipient.

Hepatitis C Recurrence after Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Mechanisms and Management

Chronic Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is the leading indication for orthotopic liver transplantation and recurrence is nearly universal. Chronic HCV infection is frequently established through evasion of the innate immune system. Priming of adaptive immune responses modulate the severity and rate of fibrosis progression. Those with demonstrable viremia entering the transplant period uniformly suffer recurrence post-transplant. Progression to cirrhosis is accelerated post-transplant secondary to systemic immunosuppression. In addition, a number of factors, including donor, host, and viral characteristics, influence severity and rate of fibrosis progression. Interferon-based therapy, the previous standard of care, in those with advanced cirrhosis or post-transplant has been limited by a number of issues. These include a relative lack of efficacy and poor tolerability with higher incidence of infection and anemia. Recently, approval of direct acting antivirals have ushered in a new era in HCV therapeutics and have applicability in these special populations. Their use immediately prior to or post-transplant is expected to improve both morbidity and mortality.

Excellent long-term patient and graft survival are possible with appropriate use of livers from deceased septuagenarian and octogenarian donors

BACKGROUND

Although increasing donor age adversely affects survival after liver transplantation, livers have been used from selected deceased donors older than 70 years. Although there are reports of excellent short-term results, long-term results are unknown. Our experience was reviewed with septuagenarian and octogenarian deceased donors to determine long-term outcomes.

METHODS

All primary deceased donor liver transplants performed at our institution between July 1998 and December 2010 were reviewed. Recipients of livers procured after circulatory arrest, split and reduced-size livers and multiple organ transplants were excluded from the study. Patient and graft survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and survival comparisons were made with the log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, 780 patients met inclusion criteria, and 109 patients received livers from donors older than 70 years (range = 70-86). There were no differences in long-term patient (P = 0.67) or graft (P = 0.42) survival between hepatitis C negative recipients of livers from older compared with younger donors. In contrast, 7-year survival for HCV-positive recipients of older donor livers was less than half that of HCV-negative recipients.

DISCUSSION

Transplantation of livers from septua- and octogenarian donors can achieve excellent long-term patient and graft survival for selected HCV-negative patients.

Natural history, treatment and prevention of hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation: Past, present and future

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease, including cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma is the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. Post-transplant HCV re-infection is almost universal and results in accelerated progression from acute hepatitis to chronic hepatitis, and liver cirrhosis. Comprehension and treatment of recurrent HCV infection after LT have been major issues for all transplant hepatologists and transplant surgeons for the last decades. The aim of this paper is to review the evolution of our knowledge on the natural history of HCV recurrence after LT, including risk factors for disease progression, and antiviral therapy. We will focus our attention on possible ways (present and future) to improve the final long-term results of LT for HCV-related liver disease.

Recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplant

End stage liver disease from hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplantation in many parts of the world accounting for up to 40% of liver transplants. Antiviral therapy either before or after liver transplantation is challenging due to side effects and lower efficacy in patients with cirrhosis and liver transplant recipients, as well as from drug interactions with immunosuppressants. Factors that may affect recurrent hepatitis C include donor age, immunosuppression, IL28B genotype, cytomegalovirus infection, and metabolic syndrome. Older donor age has persistently been shown to have the greatest impact on recurrent hepatitis C. After liver transplantation, distinguishing recurrent hepatitis C from acute cellular rejection may be difficult, although the development of molecular markers may help in making the correct diagnosis. The advent of interferon free regimens with direct acting antiviral agents that include NS3/4A protease inhibitors, NS5B polymerase inhibitors and NS5A inhibitors holds great promise in improving outcomes for liver transplant candidates and recipients.

Using old liver grafts for liver transplantation: Where are the limits?

The scarcity of ideal liver grafts for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has led transplant teams to investigate other sources of grafts in order to augment the donor liver pool. One way to get more liver grafts is to use marginal donors, a not well-defined group which includes mainly donors > 60 years, donors with hypernatremia or macrosteatosis > 30%, donors with hepatitis C virus or hepatitis B virus positive serologies, cold ischemia time > 12 h, non-heart-beating donors, and grafts from split-livers or living-related donations. Perhaps the most practical and frequent measure to increase the liver pool, and thus to reduce waiting list mortality, is to use older livers. In the past years the results of OLT with old livers have improved, mainly due to better selection and maintenance of donors, improvements in surgical techniques in donors and recipients, and intra- and post-OLT management. At the present time, sexagenarian livers are generally accepted, but there still exists some controversy regarding the use of septuagenarian and octogenarian liver grafts. The aim of this paper is to briefly review the aging process of the liver and reported experiences using old livers for OLT. Fundamentally, the series of septuagenarian and octogenarian livers will be addressed to see if there is a limit to using these aged grafts.