Recipient ineligibility after liver transplantation assessment: a single centre experience

Frequency of and reasons behind non-listing in adult patients referred for liver transplantation: Results from a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the frequency of and the reasons behind the refusal of listing liver transplantation candidates.

AIM

To assess the ineligibility rate for liver transplantation and its motivations.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was conducted on adult patients which entailed a formal multidisciplinary assessment for liver transplantation eligibility. The predictors for listing were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

In our center, 314 patients underwent multidisciplinary work-up before liver transplantation enlisting over a three-year period. The most frequent reasons for transplant evaluation were decompensated cirrhosis (51.6%) and hepatocellular carcinoma (35.7%). The non-listing rate was 53.8% and the transplant rate was 34.4% for the whole cohort. Two hundred and five motivations for ineligibility were collected. The most common contraindications were psychological (9.3%), cardiovascular (6.8%), and surgical (5.9%). Inappropriate or premature referral accounted for 76 (37.1%) cases. On multivariable analysis, a referral from another hospital (OR: 2.113; 95%CI: 1.259-3.548) served as an independent predictor of non-listing.

CONCLUSION

A non-listing decision occurred in half of our cohort and was based on an inappropriate or premature referral in one case out of three. The referral from another hospital was taken as a strong predictor of non-listing.

National survey of second opinions for hospitalized patients in need of liver transplantation

Decisions about patient candidacy for liver transplant (LT) can mean the difference between life and death. We surveyed LT centers across the United States to assess their perceptions of and barriers to second-opinion referrals for inpatients declined for transplant. The medical and surgical directors of 100 unique US LT programs that had done >20 LTs in 2021 were surveyed with a 33-item questionnaire including both multiple-choice and free-response questions. The response rate was 60% (60 LT centers) and included 28 larger-volume ( ≥100 LTs in 2021) and 32 smaller-volume (<100 LTs in 2021) programs. The top 3 reasons for inpatient denial for LT included lack of social support (21%), physical frailty (20%), and inadequate remission duration from alcohol use (11%). Twenty-five percent of the programs reported "frequently" facilitating a second opinion for a declined inpatient, 52% of the programs reported "sometimes" doing so, and 7% of the programs reported never doing so. One hundred percent of the programs reported that they receive referrals for second opinions. Twenty-five percent of the programs reported transplanting these referrals frequently (over 20% of the time). Neither program size nor program location statistically impacted the findings. When asked if centers would be in favor of standardizing the evaluation process, 38% of centers would be in favor, 39% would be opposed, and 23% were unsure. The practices and perceptions of second opinions for hospitalized patients evaluated for LT varied widely across the United States. Opportunities exist to improve equity in LT but must consider maintaining individual program autonomy.

Liver Transplantation: Contraindication and Ineligibility

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving therapeutic modality for patients with various advanced liver diseases. It is crucial to identify that the patient's illness is sufficiently advanced and unlikely to improve with medical management to justify the need for transplantation. At the same time, it is crucial to identify patients with comorbidities and far advanced disease that would result in an unacceptable outcome after LT. Specific care also is required before deciding on LT in the elderly, acute on chronic liver disease, patients with comorbidities, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Transplantation needs to be timed appropriately to avoid unnecessary LT and ensure that the decision is not left too late to avoid losing the patient without a transplant. Also, important is the decision as to when not to transplant. The current review explores some of these issues of contraindications and ineligibility for LT.

Barriers for Liver Transplant in Patients with Alcohol-Related Hepatitis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) for alcohol-related liver disease has historically been reserved for patients who have been six months abstinent. Given the increasing incidence of alcohol-related hepatitis (AH) and dismal survival in patients who fail medical therapy, transplant centers are extending their acceptance criteria for patients with less than 6 months of sobriety. We sought to determine the barriers for listing.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all inpatient LT referrals for a diagnosis of AH between September 2019 and December 2020. LT evaluations were performed by a multidisciplinary team. Descriptive statistics were reported using mean and standard deviation (SD) or percentage where appropriate.

RESULTS

During our study period, 82 patients were evaluated for LT. Of these 82 patients, 62 were declined for liver transplantation. The mean (SD) age of the 62-patient cohort was 44 years (10.7), and most patients were men. The mean (SD) number of reasons for denial was 2 (0.97). Four patients had medical contraindications for transplant. Twenty-seven (44%) and 35 (56%) patients lacked insight and were at risk of alcohol relapse, respectively. Forty-three (69%) and fourteen (22.5%) patients had insufficient social support and an inability to maintain a therapeutic relationship with the transplant team, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients are more likely denied for psychosocial factors than medical comorbidities. The majority were due to lack of insight, insufficient social support, and inability to maintain a therapeutic relationship with the transplant team. Resources should be allocated to address these issues.

CAD-LT score effectively predicts risk of significant coronary artery disease in liver transplant candidates

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with cirrhosis and significant coronary artery disease (CAD) are at risk of peri-liver transplantation (LT) cardiac events. The coronary artery disease in liver transplantation (CAD-LT) score and algorithm aim to predict the risk of significant CAD in LT candidates and guide pre-LT cardiac evaluation.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pre-LT evaluation at Indiana University (2010-2019) were studied retrospectively. Stress echocardiography (SE) and cardiac catheterization (CATH) reports were reviewed. CATH was performed for predefined CAD risk factors, irrespective of normal SE. Significant CAD was defined as CAD requiring percutaneous or surgical intervention. A multivariate regression model was constructed to assess risk factors. Receiver-operating curve analysis was used to compute a point-based risk score and a stratified testing algorithm.

RESULTS

A total of 1,771 pre-LT patients underwent cardiac evaluation, including results from 1,634 SE and 1,266 CATH assessments. Risk-adjusted predictors of significant CAD at CATH were older age (adjusted odds ratio 1.05; 95% CI 1.03-1.08), male sex (1.69; 1.16-2.50), diabetes (1.57; 1.12-2.22), hypertension (1.61; 1.14-2.28), tobacco use (pack years) (1.01; 1.00-1.02), family history of CAD (1.63; 1.16-2.28), and personal history of CAD (6.55; 4.33-9.90). The CAD-LT score stratified significant CAD risk as low (≤2%), intermediate (3% to 9%), and high (≥10%). Among patients who underwent CATH, a risk-based testing algorithm (low: no testing; intermediate: non-invasive testing vs. CATH; high: CATH) would have identified 97% of all significant CAD and potentially avoided unnecessary testing (669 SE [57%] and 561 CATH [44%]).

CONCLUSIONS

The CAD-LT score and algorithm (available at www.cad-lt.com) effectively stratify pre-LT risk for significant CAD. This may guide more targeted testing of candidates with fewer tests and faster time to waitlist.

LAY SUMMARY

The coronary artery disease in liver transplantation (CAD-LT) score and algorithm effectively stratify patients based on their risk of significant coronary artery disease. The CAD-LT algorithm can be used to guide a more targeted cardiac evaluation prior to liver transplantation.

Favorable Survival with Non-curative Treatments for Patients with Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Liver Transplant Denial

BACKGROUND

Many patients are not candidates for liver transplant for non-tumor-related reasons including medical comorbidities and non-adherence. The prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are not liver transplant candidates in the era of locoregional therapy (LRT) including y90 is not well defined.

AIMS

This study seeks to evaluate outcomes and the natural history of early-stage HCC in patients who were denied liver transplant listing due to non-tumor reasons and instead were treated with LRT.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation was performed for all patients who completed liver transplant evaluation with their tumor within Milan criteria but were denied due to non-tumor reasons and were treated with LRT at a single tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

The 61 patients included had a favorable overall survival, with a median survival 60.3 months (86.9% at 1 year and 52.7% at 5 years). Patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis (n = 34) had significantly longer overall survival compared to those with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis (median survival of 70.3 months versus 26.1 months, p = 0.005). Survival in patients with Child-Pugh A at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97%, 80%, and 73%, respectively, compared to 74%, 41%, and 31% in patients with Child-Pugh B/C.

CONCLUSIONS

In a small single-center cohort, patients with HCC who were denied liver transplant due to non-tumor reasons and underwent LRT and had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis had survival approaching the national average for patients who undergo liver transplantation. Patients with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis had significantly worse outcomes than those with Child-Pugh A.

Extra-hepatic comorbidity burden significantly increases 90-day mortality in patients with cirrhosis and high model for endstage liver disease

BACKGROUND

We examined how extra-hepatic comorbidity burden impacts mortality in patients with cirrhosis referred for liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

Adults with cirrhosis evaluated for their first LT in 2012 were followed through their clinical course with last follow up in 2019. Extra-hepatic comorbidity burden was measured using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The endpoints were 90-day transplant free survival (Cox-Proportional Hazard regression), and overall mortality (competing risk analysis).

RESULTS

The study included 340 patients, mean age 56 ± 11, 63% male and MELD-Na 17.2 ± 6.6. The CCI was 0 (no comorbidities) in 44%, 1-2 in 44% and > 2 (highest decile) in 12%, with no differences based on gender but higher CCI in patients with fatty and cryptogenic liver disease. Thirty-three (10%) of 332 patients not receiving LT within 90 days died. Beyond MELD-Na, the CCI was independently associated with 90-day mortality (hazard ratio (HR), 1.32 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.72). Ninety-day mortality was specifically increased with higher CCI category and MELD ≥18 (12% (CCI = 0), 22% (CCI = 1-2) and 33% (CCI > 2), (p = 0.002)) but not MELD-Na ≤17. At last follow-up, 69 patients were alive, 100 underwent LT and 171 died without LT. CCI was associated with increased overall mortality in the competing risk analysis (Sub-HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.1-1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Extra-hepatic comorbidity burden significantly impacts short-term mortality in patients with cirrhosis and high MELD-Na. This has implications in determining urgency of LT and mortality models in cirrhosis and LT waitlisting, especially with an ageing population with increasing prevalence of fatty liver disease.

Systematic Review: Treatment for Addictive Disorder in Transplant Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The number of patients with substance use disorders in need for organ transplantation is expected to increase. Patients with addictive disorders are considered a higher risk of negative outcomes after organ transplantation due to the impact of substance use upon medical status and adherence with treatment. The goal of this systematic review was to assess the current literature on treatment for addiction transplant candidates and recipients.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search within four databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for publications dated 1/1/1988 to 12/31/2018.

RESULTS

Out of 3108 articles identified through database screening, 39 were included in the qualitative synthesis. Sixteen studies described addiction treatment in groups over five patients. All the articles included liver transplant patients, with only two studies including patients who needed a kidney or a heart transplant. Nine articles described treatment of alcohol use disorder exclusively, five focused on treatment of opioid use disorders. Although 9 of 16 studies were prospective, the variability of the treatment intervention, outcome measures, and control group when applicable prohibited a meaningful meta-analysis of the results. Eight articles that described the case reports are analyzed separately.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Promising treatment options for alcohol use disorder have been reported but more studies are needed to confirm their effectiveness and their feasibility. Methadone appears effective for opioid disorder in transplant patients.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on the treatment of addictive disorders in transplant patients. (Am J Addict 2020;29:445-462).

Being accompanied to liver discharge clinic: An easy measure to identify potential liver transplant candidates among those previously considered ineligible

BACKGROUND

Patients with cirrhosis deemed ineligible for liver transplantation are usually followed in general hepatology or gastroenterology clinics, with the hope of re-evaluation once they meet the appropriate criteria. Specific strategies to achieve liver transplant eligibility for these patients have not been studied.

AIM

To assess clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with future liver transplant eligibility among patients initially considered ineligible.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients with cirrhosis considered non-transplant eligible, but without absolute contraindications, who were scheduled in our transitional care liver clinic (TCLC) after discharge from an inpatient liver service. Transplant candidacy was assessed 1 year after the first scheduled TCLC visit. Data on clinical and sociodemographic factors were collected.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were identified and the vast majority were Caucasian men with alcoholic cirrhosis. 46 patients (67%) presented to the first TCLC visit. Seven of 46 patients that showed to the first TCLC visit became transplant candidates, while 0 of 23 patients that no-showed did (15.2% vs 0%, P = 0.08). Six of 7 patients who showed and became transplant eligible were accompanied by family or friends at the first TCLC appointment, compared to 13 of 39 patients who showed and did not become transplant eligible (85.7% vs 33.3%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Patients who attended the first post-discharge TCLC appointment had a trend for higher liver transplant eligibility at 1 year. Being accompanied by family or friends during the first TCLC visit correlated with higher liver transplant eligibility at 1 year (attendance by family or friends was not requested). Patient and family engagement in the immediate post-hospitalization period may predict future liver transplant eligibility for patients previously declined.

Marijuana use in transplantation: A call for clarity

Transplant centers have varying policies for marijuana (MJ) use in donors, transplant candidates, and recipients. Rationales for these differences range from concerns for fungal complications, impaired adherence, and drug interactions. This paper reviews the current status of MJ policies and practices in transplant centers and results of a survey sent to the American Society of Transplantation (AST) membership by the Executive Committee of the AST Infectious Diseases Community of Practice.The purpose of the survey was to compare policies and concerns of MJ use to actual observed complications. Of the 3321 surveys sent, 225 members (8%) responded. Transplant centers varied in their approval processes, differing even in organ types within the same institutions. Furthermore, there was discordance among transplant centers in their perceived risks of marijuana use as opposed to complications actually observed. An increasing number of states continue to legalize medical and recreational MJ resulting in widespread availability. Further research is needed to assess the validity of concerns for complications of MJ use in potential donors and recipients. Ultimately, standardized guidelines should be established based on studies and evidence-based criteria to assist transplant programs in their policies around the use of cannabis in their donors and recipients.

Palliative care in end-stage liver disease: Time to do better?

Optimal involvement of palliative care (PC) services in the management of patients with decompensated cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease (ESLD) is limited. This may result from both ignorance and the failure to recognize the spectrum and unpredictability of the underlying liver condition. Palliative care is a branch of medicine that focuses on quality of life (QoL) by optimizing symptom management and providing psychosocial, spiritual, and practical support for both patients and their caregivers. Historically, palliative care has been underutilized for patients with decompensated liver disease. This review provides an evidence-based analysis of the benefits of the integration of palliative care into the management of patients with ESLD. Liver Transplantation 24 961-968 2018 AASLD.

Clinical characteristics of human immunodeficiency virus patients being referred for liver transplant evaluation: a descriptive cohort study

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is a treatment option for select human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients with advanced liver disease. The aim of this study was to describe LT evaluation outcomes in HIV-infected patients.

METHODS

All HIV-infected patients referred for their first LT evaluation at the Mount Sinai Medical Center were included in this retrospective, descriptive cohort study. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors independently associated with listing.

RESULTS

Between February 2000 and April 2012, 366 patients were evaluated for LT, with 66 (18.0%) listed for LT and 300 (82.0%) not listed. Fifty-one patients (13.9%) died before completing evaluation and 85 (23.2%) were too early for listing. Reasons patients were declined for listing were psychosocial (15.8%), HIV-related (10.4%), loss to follow-up (9.6%), surgical/medical (6.0%), liver-related (4.4%), patient choice (3.4%), and financial (1.6%). Listed patients were more likely to have hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (43.1% vs. 17.1%; P < 0.0001) and less likely to have hepatitis B (6.2% vs. 15.7%; P = 0.04) or a psychiatric history (19.7% vs. 35.2%; P = 0.02) than those not listed. In multivariable analysis, HCC (odds ratio [OR] 5.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 2.97-11.28), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score at referral (OR 1.06; 95% CI 1.01-1.11), and hepatitis B (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.08-0.79) were associated with listing.

CONCLUSION

MELD score and HCC were positive predictors of listing in HIV-infected patients referred for LT evaluation and, therefore, timely referrals are vital in these patients. As MELD is a predictor for death while undergoing evaluation, rapid evaluation should be performed in HIV-infected patients with a higher MELD score.