Liver transplantation for HBsAg-positive recipients using grafts from HBsAg-positive deceased donors

Non-Standard Risk Donors and Risk of Donor-Derived Infections: From Evaluation to Therapeutic Management

Expected and unexpected donor-derived infections are a rare complication of solid organ transplantation, but can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Over the last years, the growing gap existing between patients on the waiting list and available organs has favored the use of organs from donors with suspected or confirmed infections, thanks to the improvement of risk mitigation strategies against transmission of well recognized and emerging infections. Given the recent developments, the particular interest of this review is to summarize data on how to maximize utilization of HIV+ donors in HIV+ recipients, the use of HCV-viremic donors and HBV positive donors. This article also covers the implications for recipient of organs from donors with bacteremia and the challenge of multidrug resistant (MDR) infections. Lastly this review describes emerging risks associated with recent Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemics.

HBV-positive and HIV-positive organs in transplantation: A clinical guide for the hepatologist

Organ transplantation is a life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage organ disease, a severe condition associated with a high risk of waitlist mortality. It is primarily limited by a shortage of available organs. Maximising available donors can increase access to transplantation. Transplantation from donors positive for HBV and HIV has increased in many countries. However, antiviral therapies need to be readily available for recipients after transplantation to prevent possible reactivation of the virus following the administration of immunosuppressive therapies. Furthermore, the intentional transmission of a virus has practical, ethical, and clinical implications. In this review, we summarise the current research, focusing on grafts from donors positive for the HBV surface antigen, antibodies against the HBV core antigen, and HIV, to help hepatologists and physicians interested in transplantation to select the best antiviral and/or prophylactic regimens for after transplantation.

Use of Hepatitis B Virus-Positive Organs in Organ Transplantation

The significant morbidity and mortality of people with end-stage renal, liver, heart, and lung diseases in need of transplantation provides rationale for use of organs from donors who are hepatitis B positive. The recipient's hepatitis B status plays a key role in defining the prophylactic strategy. The availability of safe and effective therapies (hepatitis B antivirals and hepatitis B immune globulin) has contributed to the safety of using hepatitis B-positive donors. The outcomes in both liver and nonliver solid organ transplant recipients given hepatitis B-positive organs have been excellent if appropriate prophylactic therapies provided.

2020 position statement and recommendations of the European Liver and Intestine Transplantation Association (ELITA): management of hepatitis B virus-related infection before and after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis of HBV recurrence is critical after liver transplantation in HBV patients. Despite new prophylactic schemes, most European LT centres persist on a conservative approach combining hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ides analogues (NA).

AIM

This setting prompted the European Liver Intestine Transplantation Association (ELITA) to look for a consensus on the prevention of HBV recurrence.

METHODS

Based on a 4-round Delphi process, ELITA investigated 16 research questions and established 50 recommendations.

RESULTS

Prophylaxis should be driven according to 3 simplified risk groups: Low and high virological risk patients, with undetectable and detectable HBV DNA pre-LT, respectively, and special populations (HDV, HCC, poorly adherent patients). In low-risk patients, short-term (4 weeks) combination of third-generation NA+ HBIG, or third generation NA monotherapy can be considered as prophylactic options. In high-risk patients, HBIG can be discontinued once HBV DNA undetectable. Combined therapy for 1 year is advised. HBV-HCC patients should be treated according to their virological risk. In HDV/HBV patients, indefinite dual prophylaxis remains the gold standard. Full withdrawal of HBV prophylaxis following or not HBV vaccination should only be attempted in the setting of clinical trials. Organs from HBsAg+ve donors may be considered after assessment of risks, benefits, and patient consent. They should not be used if HDV is present. In poorly adherent patients, dual long-term prophylaxis is recommended. Budget impact analysis should be taken into account to drive prophylactic regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

These ELITA recommendations should stimulate a more rational and homogeneous approach to HBV prophylaxis across LT programs.

Long-term Survival of 10,116 Korean Live Liver Donors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term mortality of Korean live liver donors using data from a national donor registry by comparing it with the mortality of the general population.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although live liver donors generally have a healthy status, their long-term mortality has not been properly addressed in a large donor registry.

METHODS

Data of 10,116 live liver donors were drawn from a mandated national registry of Korean live liver donors between 2000 and 2015. Matched controls were selected from the Korean National Health Insurance System-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC). Median (range) follow-up of liver donors was 5.7 (0-15.9) years. Donors were 1:3 individually matched to controls by sex and 5-year age group; potential controls were from the whole NHIS-NSC (Control 1) or from NHIS-NSC after excluding people with contraindications to be organ donors (Control 2) (donor, n = 7538; Control 1, n = 28,248; Control 2, n = 28,248).

RESULTS

Fifty-three deaths occurred after donation. Ten-year cumulative mortality of live liver donors was 0.9%. The most common cause of death was suicide (n = 19) followed by cancer (n = 9) and traffic accident (n = 7). In the matched control analysis, overall risk of death was significantly lower in donors than in Control 1 (P < 0.001), but higher than in Control 2 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver donors have increased long-term mortality risk compared to similar healthy controls without contraindications to be organ donors. Therefore, long-term follow-up, including psychosocial support, is needed for live liver donors.

Single-Center Experience Using Marginal Liver Grafts in Korea

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is an established therapeutic modality for patients with end-stage liver disease. The use of marginal donors has become more common worldwide due to the sharp increase in recipients, with a consequent shortage of suitable organs. We analyzed our single-center experience over the last 8 years in LT to evaluate the outcomes of using so-called "marginal donors."

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the database of all LTs performed at our institution from 2009 to 2017. Only patients undergoing deceased-donor LTs were analyzed. Marginal grafts were defined as livers from donors >60 years of age, livers from donors with serum sodium levels >155 mEq, graft steatosis >30%, livers with cold ischemia time ≥12 hours, livers from donors who were hepatitis B or C virus positive, livers recovered from donation after cardiac death, and livers split between 2 recipients. Patients receiving marginal grafts (marginal group) were compared with patients receiving standard grafts (standard group).

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients underwent deceased-donor LT. There were 55 patients in the standard group and 51 patients in the marginal group. There were no significant differences in terms of age, sex, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, underlying liver disease, presence of hepatocellular carcinoma, and hospital stay between the 2 groups. Although the incidence of acute cellular rejection, cytomegalovirus infection, and postoperative complications was similar between the 2 groups, the incidence of early allograft dysfunction was higher in the marginal group. With a median follow-up of 26 months, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall and graft (death-censored) survivals in the marginal group were 85.5%, 75%, and 69.2% and 85.9%, 83.6%, and 77.2%, respectively. Patient overall survival and graft survival (death-censored) were significantly lower in the marginal group (P = .023 and P = .048, respectively). On multivariate analysis, receiving a marginal graft (hazard ratio [HR], 4.862 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.233-19.171]; P = .024) and occurrence of postoperative complications (HR, 4.547 [95% CI, 1.279-16.168]; P = .019) were significantly associated with worse patient overall survival. Also, when factors associated with marginal graft were analyzed separately, graft steatosis >30% was independently associated with survival (HR, 5.947 [95% CI, 1.481-23.886]; P = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving marginal grafts showed lower but acceptable overall survival and graft survival. However, because graft steatosis >30% was independently associated with worse survival, caution must be exercised when using this type of marginal graft by weighing the risk and benefits.

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.

Long term follow-up and outcome of liver transplantation from hepatitis B surface antigen positive donors

Liver transplant for hepatitis B virus (HBV) currently yields excellent outcomes: it allows to rescue patients with an HBV-related advanced liver disease, resulting in a demographical modification of the waiting list for liver transplant. In an age of patient-tailored treatments, in liver transplantation as well the aim is to offer the best suitable graft to the patient who can benefit from it, also expanding the criteria for organ acceptance and allocation. With the intent of developing strategies to increase the donor pool, we set-up a multicenter study involving 3 Liver Transplant Centers in Italy: patients undergoing liver transplantation between March 03, 2004, and May 21, 2010, were retrospectively evaluated. 1408 patients underwent liver transplantation during the study period, 28 (2%) received the graft from hepatitis B surface antigen positive (HBsAg)-positive deceased donors. The average follow-up after liver transplantation was 63.7 mo [range: 0.1-119.4; SD ± 35.8]. None Primary non-function, re-liver transplantation, early or late hepatic artery thrombosis occurred. The 1-, 3- and 5-year graft and patient survival resulted of 85.7%, 82.1%, 78.4%. Our results suggest that the use of HBsAg-positive donors liver grafts is feasible, since HBV can be controlled without affecting graft stability. However, the selection of grafts and the postoperative antiviral therapy should be managed appropriately.

Liver grafts from hepatitis B surface antigen-positive donors: A review of the literature

The scarcity of available organs and the gap between supply and demand continue to be the main limitations of liver transplantation. To relieve the organ shortage, current transplant strategies have implemented extended criteria, which include the use of liver from patients with signs of past or present hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. While the use of liver grafts from donors with evidence of past HBV infection is quite limited, some data have been collected regarding the feasibility of transplanting a liver graft from a hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive donor. The aim of the present work was to review the literature regarding liver transplants from HBsAg-positive donors. A total of 17 studies were identified by a search in Medline. To date, HBsAg positive grafts have preferentially been allocated to HBsAg positive recipients. The large majority of these patients continue to be HBsAg positive despite the use of immunoglobulin, and infection prevention can only be guaranteed by using antiviral prophylaxis. Although serological persistence is evident, no significant HBV-related disease has been observed, except in patients coinfected with delta virus. Consistently less data are available for HBsAg negative recipients, although they are mostly promising. HBsAg-positive grafts could be an additional organ source for liver transplantation, provided that the risk of reinfection/reactivation is properly prevented.

Intravenous immunoglobulins in liver transplant patients: Perspectives of clinical immune modulation

Shortage of appropriate donor grafts is the foremost current problem in organ transplantation. As a logical consequence, waiting times have extended and pretransplant mortality rates were significantly increasing. The implementation of a priority-based liver allocation system using the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score helped to reduce waiting list mortality in liver transplantation (LT). However, due to an escalating organ scarcity, pre-LT MELD scores have significantly increased and liver recipients became more complex in recent years. This has finally led to posttransplant decreasing survival rates, attributed mainly to elevated rates of infectious and immunologic complications. To meet this challenging development, an increasing number of extended criteria donor grafts are currently accepted, which may, however, aggravate the patients’ infectious and immunologic risk profiles. The administration of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) is an established treatment in patients with immune deficiencies and other antibody-mediated diseases. In addition, IVIg was shown to be useful in treatment of several disorders caused by deterioration of the cellular immune system. It proved to be effective in preventing hyperacute rejection in highly sensitized kidney and heart transplants. In the liver transplant setting, the administration of specific Ig against hepatitis B virus is current standard in post-LT antiviral prophylaxis. The mechanisms of action of IVIg are complex and not fully understood. However, there is increasing experimental and clinical evidence that IVIg has an immuno-balancing impact by a combination of immuno-supporting and immuno-suppressive properties. It may be suggested that, especially in the context of a worsening organ shortage with all resulting clinical implications, liver transplant patients should benefit from immuno-regulatory capabilities of IVIg. In this review, perspectives of immune modulation by IVIg and impact on outcome in liver transplant patients are described.

Safe use of liver grafts from hepatitis B surface antigen positive donors in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Liver grafts from hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive donors could have potential to increase the donor pool. However, knowledge is extremely limited in this setting because currently available data are mostly from case reports. We aimed to assess the outcomes and experiences of liver transplantation from HBsAg positive donors in a single centre study.

METHODS

From January 2010 to February 2013, 42 adult patients underwent liver transplantation from HBsAg positive donors and 327 patients from HBsAg negative ones. The outcomes including complications and survival of two groups were compared and antiviral therapy retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

HBsAg positive liver grafts were more likely to be allocated to patients with hepatitis B (HBV)-related diseases. Post-transplant evaluation showed similar graft function regaining pace and no differences in complications such as primary non-function, acute rejection and biliary complications. Patient and graft survivals were comparable to that of HBsAg negative grafts. Furthermore, HBsAg persisted after transplant in all patients that received positive grafts. The donor HBV serum status determined the one of the recipient after transplantation. No HBV flare-ups were observed under antiviral therapy of oral nucleotide analogues, regardless of using hepatitis B immunoglobulin combination.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of HBsAg positive liver grafts seems not to increase postoperative morbidity and mortality. Therefore it is a safe way to expand the donor pool when no suitable donor is available. Our experience also suggests that hepatitis B immunoglobulin should be abandoned in recipients of HBsAg positive liver grafts, in whom HBV prophylaxis could be the only oral antiviral therapy.

Expanded criteria donors

The greatest challenge facing liver transplantation today is the shortage of donor livers. Demand far exceeds supply, and this deficit has driven expansion of what is considered an acceptable organ. The evolving standard has not come without costs, however, as each new frontier of expanded donor quality (i.e., advancing donor age, donation after cardiac death, and split liver) may have traded wait-list for post-transplant morbidity and mortality. This article delineates the nature and severity of risk associated with specific deceased donor liver characteristics and recommends strategies to maximally mitigate these risks.

Μanagement of patients with hepatitis B and C before and after liver and kidney transplantation

New nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance (such as entecavir, tenofovir) have improved the prognosis of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis and have prevented HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). NAs are considered the most proper approach for HBV infection in patients under renal replacement therapy but their doses should be adjusted according to the patient's creatinine clearance. In addition, physicians should be aware of the potential nephrotoxicity. However, patients with chronic hepatitis C and decompensated cirrhosis can receive only one therapeutic option before LT, as well as for Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after LT, which is the combination of subcutaneous Peg-IFN and ribavirin. Generally, therapy for HCV after renal transplantation should be avoided. Although the optimal antiviral therapy for HCV infection has not been established, attention has turned to a new, oral direct acting antiviral treatment which marks a promising strategy in prognosis and in amelioration of these diseases.