Liver transplantation for hepatitis C from donation after cardiac death donors: an analysis of OPTN/UNOS data

Increasing Multiorgan Heart Transplantations From Donation After Circulatory Death Donors in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors are becoming an important source of organs for heart-transplantation (HT), but there are limited data regarding their use in multiorgan-HT.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and June 2023, we identified 87 adult multiorgan-HTs performed using DCD-donors [77 heart-kidney, 6 heart-lung, 4 heart-liver] and 1494 multiorgan-HTs using donation after brain death (DBD) donors (1141 heart-kidney, 165 heart-lung, 188 heart-liver) in UNOS. For heart-kidney transplantations (the most common multiorgan-HT combination from DCD-donors), we also compared donor/recipient characteristics, and early outcomes, including 6-month mortality using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox hazards-ratio (Cox-HR).

RESULTS

Use of DCD-donors for multiorgan-HTs in the United States increased from 1% in January to June 2020 to 12% in January-June 2023 (p < 0.001); but there was a wide variation across UNOS regions and center volumes. Compared to recipients of DBD heart-kidney transplantations, recipients of DCD heart-kidney transplantations were less likely to be of UNOS Status 1/2 at transplant (35.06% vs. 69.59%) and had lower inotrope use (22.08% vs. 43.30%), lower IABP use (2.60% vs. 26.29%), but higher durable CF-LVAD use (19.48% vs. 12.97%), all p < 0.01. Compared to DBD-donors, DCD-donors used for heart-kidney transplantations were younger [28(22-34) vs. 32(25-39) years, p = 0.004]. Recipients of heart-kidney transplantations from DCD-donors and DBD-donors had similar 6-month survival using both KM analysis, and unadjusted and adjusted Cox-HR models, including in propensity matched cohorts. Rates of PGF and in-hospital outcomes were also similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of DCD-donors for multiorgan-HTs has increased rapidly in the United States and early outcomes of DCD heart-kidney transplantations are promising.

Impact of Donation After Circulatory Death Allografts on Outcomes After Liver Transplant for Hepatitis C: A Single-Center Experience and Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the impact of liver transplant from donors after circulatory death on incidence and severity of recurrent hepatitis C virus infection, graft and patient survival and aimed to identify predictors of outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all liver transplants performed at a single center (July 2007-February 2014). Patients with hepatitis C who underwent liver transplant from donors after circulatory death (group 1) were compared with hepatitis C patients who received grafts from donors after brain death (group 2) and patients without hepatitis C who received grafts from donors after circulatory death (group 3).We used the Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis and performed a multivariable analysis for predictors of outcomes using Cox regression. Competing risk was used to analyze hepatitis C recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 196 patients, 107 were included: 25 in group 1, 46 in group 2, and 36 in group 3. All 3 groups were comparable, except for longer cold ischemia time (P < .01) in group 1, lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at transplant in groups 1 and 3 (P < .01), and greater proportion of recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma in groups 1 and 2 (P = .02). Hepatitis C recurrence and severe recurrence at 1 and 3 years were higher in group 1 (but not statistically significant). Severe recurrence was noted in 17% versus 8% at 1 year (P = .12) and 30% versus 14% at 3 years (P = .08). Graft and patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were comparable in all 3 study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent hepatitis C, including severe recurrence, was greater following donation after circulatory death compared with donation after brain death liver transplant. However, graft survival and patient survival were comparable, including in recipients of donation after circulatory death grafts without hepatitis C.

Feasibility and Potential Impact of Heart Transplantation From Adult Donors After Circulatory Death

BACKGROUND

A shortage of donation after brain death (DBD) donors for heart transplantation (HT) persists. Recent improvements in organ procurement from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors and promising early results of DCD-HTs from Europe and Australia have renewed interest in DCD-HT.

OBJECTIVES

The current study evaluated donor and recipient characteristics, early outcomes, and potential impact of adult DCD-HT in the United States.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was used to identify and compare adult DCD donors based on their use for HT between January 2020 and February 2021. Adult DCD-HTs with available post-HT outcomes data were compared with contemporary adult DBD-HTs during study period using Cox-regression analysis and propensity-matching.

RESULTS

Of the 3,611 adult DCD donors referred during the study period, 136 were used for HT. DCD donors used for HT were younger (median age 29 years), and most were male (90%), and blood type O (79%). On comparing DCD-HT (n = 127) and DBD-HT (n = 2,961) meeting study criteria and with available data on post-HT outcomes, there was no significant difference in 30-day or 6-month mortality, primary graft failure up to 30 days, or other outcomes including in-hospital stroke, pacemaker insertion, hemodialysis, and post-HT length of hospital stay. Results were similar in propensity matched DCD-HT and DBD-HT cohorts. The number of potential adult DCD donors referred has increased substantially (n = 871 in 2010 to n = 3,045 in 2020), and the authors estimated that widespread adoption of DCD-HT could lead to approximately 300 additional adult HTs in the United States annually.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary analysis of adult DCD-HTs from the United States showed favorable early outcomes and suggested a potential for substantial increase in adult HT volumes with use of DCD donors.

Sofosbuvir-Based Therapy in the Pre-Liver Transplant Setting: The Canadian National Experience

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Sofosbuvir (SOF)-based regimen has been shown to have high efficacy even in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Treated patients may experience various degrees of hepatic recovery ranging from stabilization of liver function, to removal from liver transplant wait lists. The frequency of these occurrences in larger transplant eligible patient populations is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of SOF-based therapy in HCV infected transplant eligible patients and to evaluate short term changes in liver function and the effect on their liver transplant status.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter Canadian study of liver transplant candidates with advanced HCV cirrhosis treated with SOF-based therapy. Outcomes included sustained virologic response (SVR), and liver transplant status.

RESULTS

105 liver transplant candidates with advanced liver disease due to HCV were evaluated. The overall SVR was 83.8%. Hepatocellular carcinoma was diagnosed in 39 (37.1%) prior to transplant evaluation. In short term follow-up, 14 (13.3%) remained active on the list at the time of SVR12, 22 (20.9%) patients underwent liver transplantation, 7 (6.6%) patients were deactivated due to clinical improvement, 3 patients were delisted, and 10 deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

SOF-based therapy for patients progressing to liver transplantation leads to high SVR rates, short term stability in liver function, and deactivation from the transplant list .

Pharmacological interventions for acute hepatitis C infection

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a single-stranded RNA (ribonucleic acid) virus that has the potential to cause inflammation of the liver. The traditional definition of acute HCV infection is the first six months following infection with the virus. Another commonly used definition of acute HCV infection is the absence of HCV antibody and subsequent seroconversion (presence of HCV antibody in a person who was previously negative for HCV antibody). Approximately 40% to 95% of people with acute HCV infection develop chronic HCV infection, that is, have persistent HCV RNA in their blood. In 2010, an estimated 160 million people worldwide (2% to 3% of the world's population) had chronic HCV infection. The optimal pharmacological treatment of acute HCV remains controversial. Chronic HCV infection can damage the liver.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different pharmacological interventions in the treatment of acute HCV infection through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the available pharmacological treatments according to their safety and efficacy. However, it was not possible to assess whether the potential effect modifiers were similar across different comparisons. Therefore, we did not perform the network meta-analysis and instead we assessed the comparative benefits and harms of different interventions versus each other or versus no intervention using standard Cochrane methodology.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and randomised controlled trials registers to April 2016 to identify randomised clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for acute HCV infection.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in participants with acute HCV infection. We excluded trials which included previously liver transplanted participants and those with other coexisting viral diseases. We considered any of the various pharmacological interventions compared with placebo or each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and rate ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models based on the available-participant analysis with Review Manager 5. We assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane, controlled risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis, and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 randomised clinical trials with 488 randomised participants that met our inclusion criteria. All the trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains. Overall, the evidence for all the outcomes was very low quality evidence. Nine trials (467 participants) provided information for one or more outcomes. Three trials (99 participants) compared interferon-alpha versus no intervention. Three trials (90 participants) compared interferon-beta versus no intervention. One trial (21 participants) compared pegylated interferon-alpha versus no intervention, but it did not provide any data for analysis. One trial (41 participants) compared MTH-68/B vaccine versus no intervention. Two trials (237 participants) compared pegylated interferon-alpha versus pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin. None of the trials compared direct-acting antivirals versus placebo or other interventions. The mean or median follow-up period in the trials ranged from six to 36 months.There was no short-term mortality (less than one year) in any group in any trial except for one trial where one participant died in the pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin group (1/95: 1.1%). In the trials that reported follow-up beyond one year, there were no further deaths. The number of serious adverse events was higher with pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin than with pegylated interferon-alpha (rate ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.40 to 5.33; participants = 237; trials = 2; I2 = 0%). The proportion of people with any adverse events was higher with interferon-alpha and interferon-beta compared with no intervention (OR 203.00, 95% CI 9.01 to 4574.81; participants = 33; trials = 1 and OR 27.88, 95% CI 1.48 to 526.12; participants = 40; trials = 1). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life, liver transplantation, decompensated liver disease, cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma. The proportion of people with chronic HCV infection as indicated by the lack of sustained virological response was lower in the interferon-alpha group versus no intervention (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.76; participants = 99; trials = 3; I2 = 0%). The differences between the groups were imprecise or not estimable (because neither group had any events) for all the remaining comparisons.Four of the 10 trials (40%) received financial or other assistance from pharmaceutical companies who would benefit from the findings of the research; the source of funding was not available in five trials (50%), and one trial (10%) was funded by a hospital.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low quality evidence suggests that interferon-alpha may decrease the incidence of chronic HCV infection as measured by sustained virological response. However, the clinical impact such as improvement in health-related quality of life, reduction in cirrhosis, decompensated liver disease, and liver transplantation has not been reported. It is also not clear whether this finding is applicable in the current clinical setting dominated by the use of pegylated interferons and direct-acting antivirals, although we found no evidence to support that pegylated interferons or ribavirin or both are effective in people with acute HCV infection. We could find no randomised trials comparing direct-acting antivirals with placebo or other interventions for acute HCV infection. There is significant uncertainty in the benefits and harms of the interventions, and high-quality randomised clinical trials are required.

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.

Pharmacological interventions for acute hepatitis C infection: an attempted network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a single-stranded RNA (ribonucleic acid) virus that has the potential to cause inflammation of the liver. The traditional definition of acute HCV infection is the first six months following infection with the virus. Another commonly used definition of acute HCV infection is the absence of HCV antibody and subsequent seroconversion (presence of HCV antibody in a person who was previously negative for HCV antibody). Approximately 40% to 95% of people with acute HCV infection develop chronic HCV infection, that is, have persistent HCV RNA in their blood. In 2010, an estimated 160 million people worldwide (2% to 3% of the world's population) had chronic HCV infection. The optimal pharmacological treatment of acute HCV remains controversial. Chronic HCV infection can damage the liver.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different pharmacological interventions in the treatment of acute HCV infection through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the available pharmacological treatments according to their safety and efficacy. However, it was not possible to assess whether the potential effect modifiers were similar across different comparisons. Therefore, we did not perform the network meta-analysis, and instead, we assessed the comparative benefits and harms of different interventions versus each other or versus no intervention using standard Cochrane methodology.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and randomised controlled trials registers to April 2016 to identify randomised clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for acute HCV infection.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in participants with acute HCV infection. We excluded trials which included previously liver transplanted participants and those with other coexisting viral diseases. We considered any of the various pharmacological interventions compared with placebo or each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and rate ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models based on the available-participant analysis with Review Manager 5. We assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane, controlled risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis, and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 randomised clinical trials with 488 randomised participants that met our inclusion criteria. All the trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains. Overall, the evidence for all the outcomes was very low quality evidence. Nine trials (467 participants) provided information for one or more outcomes. Three trials (99 participants) compared interferon-alpha versus no intervention. Three trials (90 participants) compared interferon-beta versus no intervention. One trial (21 participants) compared pegylated interferon-alpha versus no intervention, but it did not provide any data for analysis. One trial (41 participants) compared MTH-68/B vaccine versus no intervention. Two trials (237 participants) compared pegylated interferon-alpha versus pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin. None of the trials compared direct-acting antivirals versus placebo or other interventions. The mean or median follow-up period in the trials ranged from six to 36 months.There was no short-term mortality (less than one year) in any group in any trial except for one trial where one participant died in the pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin group (1/95: 1.1%). In the trials that reported follow-up beyond one year, there were no further deaths. The number of serious adverse events was higher with pegylated interferon-alpha plus ribavirin than with pegylated interferon-alpha (rate ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.40 to 5.33; participants = 237; trials = 2; I2 = 0%). The proportion of people with any adverse events was higher with interferon-alpha and interferon-beta compared with no intervention (OR 203.00, 95% CI 9.01 to 4574.81; participants = 33; trials = 1 and OR 27.88, 95% CI 1.48 to 526.12; participants = 40; trials = 1). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life, liver transplantation, decompensated liver disease, cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma. The proportion of people with chronic HCV infection as indicated by the lack of sustained virological response was lower in the interferon-alpha group versus no intervention (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.76; participants = 99; trials = 3; I2 = 0%). The differences between the groups were imprecise or not estimable (because neither group had any events) for all the remaining comparisons.Four of the 10 trials (40%) received financial or other assistance from pharmaceutical companies who would benefit from the findings of the research; the source of funding was not available in five trials (50%), and one trial (10%) was funded by a hospital.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low quality evidence suggests that interferon-alpha may decrease the incidence of chronic HCV infection as measured by sustained virological response. However, the clinical impact such as improvement in health-related quality of life, reduction in cirrhosis, decompensated liver disease, and liver transplantation has not been reported. It is also not clear whether this finding is applicable in the current clinical setting dominated by the use of pegylated interferons and direct-acting antivirals, although we found no evidence to support that pegylated interferons or ribavirin or both are effective in people with acute HCV infection. We could find no randomised trials comparing direct-acting antivirals with placebo or other interventions for acute HCV infection. There is significant uncertainty in the benefits and harms of the interventions, and high-quality randomised clinical trials are required.

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.

Extended criteria donors in liver transplantation Part I: reviewing the impact of determining factors

The definition and factors of extended criteria donors have already been set; however, details of the various opinions still differ in many respects. In this review, we summarize the impact of these factors and their clinical relevance. Elderly livers must not be allocated for hepatitis C virus (HCV) positives, or patients with acute liver failure. In cases of markedly increased serum transaminases, donor hemodynamics is an essential consideration. A prolonged hypotension of the donor does not always lead to an increase in post-transplantation graft loss if post-OLT care is proper. Hypernatremia of less than 160 mEq/L is not an absolute contraindication to accept a liver graft per se. The presence of steatosis is an independent and determinant risk factor for the outcome. The gold standard of the diagnosis is the biopsy. This is recommended in all doubtful cases. The use of HCV+ grafts for HCV+ recipients is comparable in outcome. The leading risk factor for HCV recurrence is the actual RNA positivity of the donor. The presence of a proper anti-HBs level seems to protect from de novo HBV infection. A favourable outcome can be expected if a donation after cardiac death liver is transplanted in a favourable condition, meaning, a warm ischemia time < 30 minutes, cold ischemia time < 8-10 hours, and donor age 50-60 years. The pathway of organ quality assessment is to obtain the most relevant information (e.g. biopsy), consider the co-existing donor risk factors and the reserve capacity of the recipient, and avoid further technical issues.

PEGYLATED INTERFERON AND RIBAVIRIN FOR TREATMENT OF RECURRENT HEPATITIS C AFTER LIVER TRANSPLANTATION: a single-liver transplant center experience in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in post-transplantation patients is a challenge due to poor tolerance and low success rates.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the response rate to pegylated interferon and ribavirin in post-liver transplant patients with hepatitis C recurrence.

METHODS

Between 18 May 2002 and 18 December 2011, 601 patients underwent liver transplantation at our service (Hospital Universitário Walter Cantídio, University of Ceará), 176 (29.2%) of whom were hepatitis C virus positive. Forty received antiviral therapy and were included in this cohort study. Twenty-eight (70%) completed the treatment protocol, which consisted of pegylated interferon and ribavirin for 48 weeks.

RESULTS

The sustained virological response rate was 55% according to intention-to-treat analysis. Recipient age and exposure to antiviral drugs prior to liver transplantation were associated with sustained virological response in the multivariate analysis. Patients were followed for 57 months on the average. Survival at 1 and 5 years was 100% in responders, versus 100% and 78%, respectively, in non-responders.

CONCLUSION

Sustained virological response rates were satisfactory in our series of liver transplantation patients, and decreased with increasing recipient age. Non-exposure to antiviral drugs prior to liver transplantation was positively associated with sustained virological response. The overall survival of responders and non-responders was similar.

Secondary analysis of large databases for hepatology research

Secondary analysis of large datasets involves the utilization of existing data that has typically been collected for other purposes to advance scientific knowledge. This is an established methodology applied in health services research with the unique advantage of efficiently identifying relationships between predictor and outcome variables but which has been underutilized for hepatology research. Our review of 1431 abstracts published in the 2013 European Association for the Study of Liver (EASL) abstract book showed that less than 0.5% of published abstracts utilized secondary analysis of large database methodologies. This review paper describes existing large datasets that can be exploited for secondary analyses in liver disease research. It also suggests potential questions that could be addressed using these data warehouses and highlights the strengths and limitations of each dataset as described by authors that have previously used them. The overall goal is to bring these datasets to the attention of readers and ultimately encourage the consideration of secondary analysis of large database methodologies for the advancement of hepatology.

The new era of hepatitis C virus therapy

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) has a significant medical and economic impact on societies around the world, and it has been estimated that 130-180 million people are infected with HCV. Therapies for HCV are currently undergoing a revolution. In recent years, several new treatments have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, and many other treatments are in phase II or III clinical trials, including direct antiviral agents (DAAs). Due to recent major advances in the field of HCV therapy, a summary of findings on new HCV therapies are provided in this review article, including reports on new DAAs.

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.

Liver transplantation with grafts obtained after cardiac death-current advances in mastering the challenge

The scarcity of donor livers has increased the interest in donation after cardiac death (DCD) as an additional pool to expand the availability of organs. However, the initial results of liver transplantation with DCD grafts have been suboptimal due to an increased rate of complications, as well as decreased graft survival. These challenges have led to many developments in DCD donation outcome, as well as basic and translational research. In this article we review the unique characteristics of DCD donors, nuances of DCD organ procurement, the effect of prolonged warm and cold ischemia times, and discuss major studies that compared DCD to donation after brain death liver transplantation, in terms of outcomes and complications. We also review the different methods of donor treatment that has been applied to ameliorate DCD organ outcome, and we discuss the role of machine perfusion techniques in organ reconditioning. We discuss the two major perfusion models, namely, hypothermic machine perfusion and normothermic machine perfusion; we compare both methods, and delineate their major differences.

Live liver donors' risk thresholds: risking a life to save a life

BACKGROUND

There is still some controversy regarding the ethical issues involved in live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and there is uncertainty on the range of perioperative morbidity and mortality risks that donors will consider acceptable.

METHODS

This study analysed donors' inclinations towards LDLT using decision analysis techniques based on the probability trade-off (PTO) method. Adult individuals with an emotional or biological relationship with a patient affected by end-stage liver disease were enrolled. Of 122 potential candidates, 100 were included in this study.

RESULTS

The vast majority of participants (93%) supported LDLT. The most important factor influencing participants' decisions was their wish to improve the recipient's chance of living a longer life. Participants chose to become donors if the recipient was required to wait longer than a mean ± standard deviation (SD) of 6 ± 5 months for a cadaveric graft, if the mean ± SD probability of survival was at least 46 ± 30% at 1 month and at least 36 ± 29% at 1 year, and if the recipient's life could be prolonged for a mean ± SD of at least 11 ± 22 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential donors were risk takers and were willing to donate when given the opportunity. They accepted significant risks, especially if they had a close emotional relationship with the recipient.

Comparing outcomes of donation after cardiac death versus donation after brain death in liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) using organs donated after cardiac death (DCD) is increasing due, in large part, to a shortage of organs. The outcome of using DCD organs in recipients with hepatits C virus (HCV) infection remains unclear due to the limited experience and number of publications addressing this issue.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of DCD versus donation after brain death (DBD) in HCV-positive patients undergoing LT.

METHODS

Studies comparing DCD versus DBD LT in HCV-positive patients were identified based on systematic searches of seven electronic databases and multiple sources of gray literature.

RESULTS

The search identified 58 citations, including three studies, with 324 patients meeting eligibility criteria. The use of DCD livers was associated with a significantly higher risk of primary nonfunction (RR 5.49 [95% CI 1.53 to 19.64]; P=0.009; I2=0%), while not associated with a significantly different patient survival (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.37 to 2.11]; P=0.79; I2=51%), graft survival (RR 0.40 [95% CI 0.14 to 1.11]; P=0.08; I2=34%), rate of recurrence of severe HCV infection (RR 2.74 [95% CI 0.36 to 20.92]; P=0.33; I2=84%), retransplantation or liver disease-related death (RR 1.79 [95% CI 0.66 to 4.84]; P=0.25; I2=44%), and biliary complications.

CONCLUSIONS

While the literature and quality of studies assessing DCD versus DBD grafts are limited, there was significantly more primary nonfunction and a trend toward decreased graft survival, but no significant difference in biliary complications or recipient mortality rates between DCD and DBD LT in patients with HCV infection. There is insufficient literature on the topic to draw any definitive conclusions.

Inferior survival in liver transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving donation after cardiac death liver allografts

The impact of ischemia/reperfusion injury in the setting of transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been thoroughly investigated. The present study examined data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for all recipients of deceased donor liver transplants performed between January 1, 1995 and October 31, 2011. In a multivariate Cox analysis, significant predictors of patient survival included the following: HCC diagnosis (P < 0.01), donation after cardiac death (DCD) allograft (P < 0.001), hepatitis C virus-positive status (P < 0.01), recipient age (P < 0.01), donor age (P < 0.001), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P < 0.001), recipient race, and an alpha-fetoprotein level > 400 ng/mL at the time of transplantation. In order to test whether the decreased survival seen for HCC recipients of DCD grafts was more than would be expected because of the inferior nature of DCD grafts and the diagnosis of HCC, a DCD allograft/HCC diagnosis interaction term was created to look for potentiation of effect. In a multivariate analysis adjusted for all other covariates, this interaction term was statistically significant (P = 0.049) and confirmed that there was potentiation of inferior survival with the use of DCD allografts in recipients with HCC. In conclusion, patient survival and graft survival were inferior for HCC recipients of DCD allografts versus recipients of donation after brain death allografts. This potentiation of effect of inferior survival remained even after adjustments for the inherent inferiority observed in DCD allografts as well as other known risk factors. It is hypothesized that this difference could reflect an increased rate of recurrence of HCC.

[Liver transplant with donated graft after controlled cardiac death. Current situation]

An increasing pressure on the liver transplant waiting list, forces us to explore new sources, in order to expand the donor pool. One of the most interesting and with a promising potential, is donation after cardiac death (DCD). Initially, this activity has developed in Spain by means of the Maastricht type II donation in the uncontrolled setting. For different reasons, donation after controlled cardiac death has been reconsidered in our country. The most outstanding circumstance involved in DCD donation is a potential ischemic stress, that could cause severe liver graft cell damage, resulting in an adverse effect on liver transplant results, in terms of complications and outcomes. The complex and particular issues related to DCD Donation will be discussed in this review.

Deceased donor risk factors influencing liver transplant outcome

As the pressure for providing liver transplantation to more and more candidates increases, transplant programs have begun to consider deceased donor characteristics that were previously considered unacceptable. With this trend, attention has focused on better defining those donor factors that can impact the outcome of liver transplantation. This review examines deceased donor factors that have been associated with patient or graft survival as well as delayed graft function and other liver transplant results.

Establishing a brain-death donor model in pigs

INTRODUCTION

An animal model that imitates human conditions might be useful not only to monitor pathomechanisms of brain death and biochemical cascades but also to investigate novel strategies to ameliorate organ quality and functionality after multiorgan donation.

METHODS

Brain death was induced in 15 pigs by inserting a catheter into the intracranial space after trephination of the skull and augmenting intracranial pressure until brain stem herniation. Intracranial pressure was monitored continuously; after 60 minutes, brain death diagnostics were performed by a neurologist including electroencephalogram (EEG) and clinical examinations. Clinical examinations included testing of brain stem reflexes as well as apnoe testing; then intensive donor care was performed according to standard guidelines until 24 hours after confirmation of brain death. Intensive donor care was performed according to standard guidelines for 24 hours after brain death.

RESULTS

Sixty minutes after brain-death induction, neurological examination and EEG examination confirmed brain death. Intracranial pressure increased continuously, remaining stable after the occurrence of brain death. All 15 animals showed typical signs of brain death such as diabetes insipidus, hypertensive and hypotensive periods, as well as tachycardia. All symptoms were treated with standard medications. After 24 hours of brain death we performed successful multiorgan retrieval.

DISCUSSION

Brain death can be induced in a pig model by inserting a catheter after trephination of the skull. According to standard guidelines the brain-death diagnosis was established by a flat-line EEG, which occurred in all animals at 60 minutes after induction.

Increased duration of dual pegylated interferon and ribavirin therapy for genotype 1 hepatitis C post-liver transplantation increases sustained virologic response: a retrospective review

BACKGROUND/AIM

In patients with advanced post-transplant hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence, antiviral treatment (AVT) with interferon and ribavirin is indicated to prevent graft failure. The aim of this study was to determine and report Canadian data with respect to the safety, efficacy, and spontaneous virologic response (SVR) predictors of AVT among transplanted patients with HCV recurrence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on patients transplanted in London, Ontario and Edmonton, Alberta from 2002 to 2012 who were treated for HCV. Demographic, medical, and treatment information was collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients with HCV received pegylated interferon with ribavirin post-liver transplantation and 28 of the 65 patients (43%) with genotype 1 achieved SVR. Of the patients having genotype 1 HCV who achieved SVR, there was a significantly lower stage of fibrosis (1.37 ± 0.88 vs. 1.89 ± 0.96; P = 0.03), increased ribavirin dose (total daily dose 1057 ± 230 vs. 856 ± 399 mg; P = 0.02), increased rapid virologic response (RVR) (6/27 vs. 0/31; P = 0.05), increased early virologic response (EVR) (28/28 vs. 18/35; P = 0.006), and longer duration of therapy (54.7 ± 13.4 weeks vs. 40.2 ± 18.7; P = 0.001). A logistic regression model using gender, age, RVR, EVR, anemia, duration of therapy, viral load, years' post-transplant, and type of organ (donation after cardiac death vs. donation after brain death) significantly predicted SVR (P < 0.001), with duration of therapy having a significant odds ratio of 1.078 (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified factors that predict SVR in HCV-positive patients who received dual therapy post-transplantation. Extending therapy from 48 weeks to 72 weeks of dual therapy is associated with increased SVR rates. Future studies examining the role of extended therapy are needed to confirm these findings, since the current study is a retrospective one.

Donation after cardio-circulatory death liver transplantation

The renewed interest in donation after cardio-circulatory death (DCD) started in the 1990s following the limited success of the transplant community to expand the donation after brain-death (DBD) organ supply and following the request of potential DCD families. Since then, DCD organ procurement and transplantation activities have rapidly expanded, particularly for non-vital organs, like kidneys. In liver transplantation (LT), DCD donors are a valuable organ source that helps to decrease the mortality rate on the waiting lists and to increase the availability of organs for transplantation despite a higher risk of early graft dysfunction, more frequent vascular and ischemia-type biliary lesions, higher rates of re-listing and re-transplantation and lower graft survival, which are obviously due to the inevitable warm ischemia occurring during the declaration of death and organ retrieval process. Experimental strategies intervening in both donors and recipients at different phases of the transplantation process have focused on the attenuation of ischemia-reperfusion injury and already gained encouraging results, and some of them have found their way from pre-clinical success into clinical reality. The future of DCD-LT is promising. Concerted efforts should concentrate on the identification of suitable donors (probably Maastricht category III DCD donors), better donor and recipient matching (high risk donors to low risk recipients), use of advanced organ preservation techniques (oxygenated hypothermic machine perfusion, normothermic machine perfusion, venous systemic oxygen persufflation), and pharmacological modulation (probably a multi-factorial biologic modulation strategy) so that DCD liver allografts could be safely utilized and attain equivalent results as DBD-LT.

Liver transplantation in the setting of chronic HCV

Recurrent HCV disease is the most common cause of graft loss and patient mortality in HCV-infected liver transplant (LT) recipients. Risk factors for more severe recurrence that are potentially modifiable are older donor age, prolonged cold ischaemia time, prior treated acute rejection, CMV hepatitis, IL28B donor genotype, and post-LT insulin resistance. The most effective means of preventing HCV recurrence is eradicating HCV prior to LT. Select wait-list candidates with compensated or mildly decompensated disease can be considered for antiviral treatment with peginterferon, ribavirin (and protease inhibitor if genotype 1). For the majority of LT patients, HCV treatment must be delayed until post-transplant. Treatment is generally undertaken if histologic severity reaches grade 3 or 4 necroinflammation or stage ≥2 fibrosis, or if cholestatic hepatitis. Achievement of sustained viral response (SVR) post-LT is associated with stabilization of fibrosis and improved graft survival. SVR is attained in ~30% of patients treated with peginterferon and ribavirin. Poor tolerability of therapy is a limitation. Combination therapy with telaprevir or boceprevir added to peginterferon and ribavirin is anticipated to increase efficacy but with higher rates of adverse effects and challenges in managing drug-drug interactions between the protease inhibitors and calcineurin inhibitors/sirolimus.

Liver transplantation and hepatitis C

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompensation. The use of poor quality organs, particularly from older donors, has a highly negative impact on the severity of recurrence and patient/graft survival. Although immunosuppressive regimens have a considerable impact on the outcome, the optimal regimen after liver transplantation for HCV-infected patients remains unclear. Disease progression monitoring with protocol biopsy and new noninvasive methods is essential for predicting patient/graft outcome and starting antiviral treatment with the appropriate timing. Antiviral treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. Living-donor liver transplantation is now widely accepted as an established treatment for HCV cirrhosis and the results are equivalent to those of deceased donor liver transplantation.