Twitter debate: controversies in liver transplantation

Regional variations in inpatient decompensated cirrhosis mortality may be associated with access to specialist care: results from a multicentre retrospective study

Introduction

Specialist centres have been developed to deliver high-quality Hepatology care. However, there is geographical inequity in accessing these centres in the United Kingdom (UK). We aimed to assess the impact of these centres on decompensated cirrhosis patient outcomes and understand which patients transfer to specialist centres.

Methods

A UK multicentred retrospective observational study was performed including emergency admissions for patients with decompensated cirrhosis in November 2019. Admissions were grouped by specialist/non-specialist centre designation, National Health Service region and whether a transfer to a more specialist centre occurred or not. Univariable and multivariable comparisons were made.

Results

1224 admissions (1168 patients) from 104 acute hospitals were included in this analysis. Patients at specialist centres were more likely to be managed by a Consultant Gastroenterologist/Hepatologist on a Gastroenterology/Hepatology ward. Only 24 patients were transferred to a more specialist centre. These patients were more likely to be admitted for gastrointestinal bleeding and were not using alcohol. Specialist centres eliminated regional variations in mortality which were present at non-specialist centres. Low specialist Consultant staffing numbers impacted mortality at non-specialist centres (aOR 2.15 (95% CI 1.18 to 4.07)) but not at specialist centres. Hospitals within areas of high prevalence of deprivation were more likely to have lower specialist Consultant staffing numbers.

Conclusions

Specialist Hepatology centres improve patient care and standardise outcomes for patients with decompensated cirrhosis. There is a need to support service development and care delivery at non-specialist centres. Formal referral pathways are required to ensure all patients receive access to specialist interventions.

Satellite liver transplant centres significantly improve transplant assessment outcomes for patients with chronic liver disease but not hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Liver transplantation (LT) remains integral to the management of end-stage chronic liver disease (CLD). However, referral thresholds and assessment pathways remain poorly defined. Distance from LT centre has been demonstrated to impact negatively on patient outcomes resulting in the development of satellite LT centres (SLTCs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of SLTCs on LT assessment in patients with CLD and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was undertaken including all patients with CLD or HCC assessed for LT at King's College Hospital (KCH) between October 2014 and October 2019. Referral location, social, demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to assess the impact of SLTCs on patients being accepted as LT candidates and contraindications being identified.

Results

1102 and 240 LT assessments were included for patients with CLD and HCC, respectively. MVA demonstrated significant associations with; patients living greater than 60 min from KCH/SLTCs and LT candidacy acceptance in CLD, and less deprived patients and LT candidacy acceptance in HCC. However, neither variable was associated with identification of LT contraindications. MVA demonstrated that referrals from SLTCs were more likely to result in acceptance of LT candidacy and less likely to result in a contraindication being identified in CLD. However, such associations were not demonstrated in HCC.

Conclusion

SLTCs improve LT assessment outcomes in CLD but not HCC reflecting the standardised HCC referral pathway. Developing a formal regional LT assessment pathway across the UK would improve equity of access to transplantation.