Can we reduce ischemic cholangiopathy rates in donation after cardiac death liver transplantation after 10 years of practice? Canadian single-centre experience

Strategies to Improve the Utilization and Function of DCD Livers

Despite the increased usage of livers from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors in the last decade, many patients remaining on the waitlist who need a liver transplant. Recent efforts have focused on maximizing the utilization and outcomes of these allografts using advances in machine perfusion technology and other perioperative strategies such as normothermic regional perfusion (NRP). In addition to the standard donor and recipient matching that is required with DCD donation, new data regarding the impact of graft steatosis, extensive European experience with NRP, and the increasing use of normothermic and hypothermic machine perfusion have shown immense potential in increasing DCD organ overall utilization and improved outcomes. These techniques, along with viability testing of extended criteria donors, have generated early promising data to consider the use of higher-risk donor organs and more widespread adoption of these techniques in the United States. This review explores the most recent international literature regarding strategies to optimize the utilization and outcomes of DCD liver allografts, including donor-recipient matching, perioperative strategies including NRP versus rapid controlled DCD recovery, viability assessment of discarded livers, and postoperative strategies including machine perfusion versus pharmacologic interventions.

Older liver grafts from donation after circulatory death are associated with impaired survival and higher incidence of biliary non-anastomotic stricture

BACKGROUND

Grafts from older donors after circulatory death were associated with inferior outcome in liver transplants in the past. But it has seemed to remain controversial in the last decade, as a result of modified clinical protocols, selected recipients, and advanced technology of organ perfusion and preservation. The present study aimed to examine the impact of older donor age on complications and survival of liver transplant using grafts from donation after circulatory death (DCD).

METHODS

A total of 944 patients who received DCD liver transplantation from 2015 to 2020 were included and divided into two groups: using graft from older donor (aged ≥ 65 years, n = 87) and younger donor (age < 65 years, n = 857). Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to eliminate selection bias.

RESULTS

A progressively increased proportion of liver transplants with grafts from older donors was observed from 1.68% to 15.44% during the study period. The well-balanced older donor (n = 79) and younger donor (n = 79) were 1:1 matched. There were significantly more episodes of biliary non-anastomotic stricture (NAS) in the older donor group than the younger donor group [15/79 (19.0%) vs. 6/79 (7.6%); P = 0.017]. The difference did not reach statistical significance regarding early allograft dysfunction (EAD) and primary non-function (PNF). Older livers had a trend toward inferior 1-, 2-, 3-year graft and overall survival compared with younger livers, but these differences were not statistically significant (63.1%, 57.6%, 57.6% vs. 76.9%, 70.2%, 67.7%, P = 0.112; 64.4%, 58.6%, 58.6% vs. 76.9%, 72.2%, 72.2%, P = 0.064). The only risk factor for poor survival was ABO incompatible transplant (P = 0.008) in the older donor group. In the subgroup of ABO incompatible cases, it demonstrated a significant difference in the rate of NAS between the older donor group and the younger donor group [6/8 (75.0%) vs. 3/14 (21.4%); P = 0.014].

CONCLUSIONS

Transplants with grafts from older donors (aged ≥ 65 years) after circulatory death are more frequently associated with inferior outcome compared to those from younger donors. Older grafts from DCD are more likely to develop NAS, especially in ABO incompatible cases.

The positive impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on organ utilisation in liver transplantation

Background

As the world recovers from the aftermath of devastating waves of an outbreak, the ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has presented a unique perspective to the transplantation community of ''organ utilisation'' in liver transplantation, a poorly defined term and ongoing hurdle in this field. To this end, we report the key metrics of transplantation activity from a high-volume liver transplantation centre in the United Kingdom over the past two years.

Methods

Between March 2019 and February 2021, details of donor liver offers received by our centre from National Health Service Blood & Transplant, and of transplantation were reviewed. Differences in the activity before and after the outbreak of the pandemic, including short term post-transplant survival, have been reported.

Results

The pandemic year at our centre witnessed a higher utilisation of Donation after Cardiac Death livers (80.4% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.016) with preserved United Kingdom donor liver indices and median donor age (2.12 vs. 2.02, p = 0.638; 55 vs. 57 years, p = 0.541) when compared to the pre-pandemic year. The 1- year patient survival rates for recipients in both the periods were comparable. The pandemic year, that was associated with increased utilisation of Donation after Cardiac Death livers, had an ischaemic cholangiopathy rate of 6%.

Conclusions

The pressures imposed by the pandemic led to increased utilisation of specific donor livers to meet patient needs and minimise the risk of death on the waiting list, with apparently preserved early post-transplant survival. Optimum organ utilisation is a balancing act between risk and benefit for the potential recipient, and technologies like machine perfusion may allow surgeons to increase utilisation without compromising patient outcomes.

Single Center Experience with Incidence, Impact and Predictors of Biliary Complications in Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation

Introduction: Utilizing allografts from donors after cardiac death (DCD) has improved organ availability, and DCD livers comprise a growing proportion of transplantations. However, it has been suggested that DCD transplantations have worse outcomes. Research Questions: We aimed to characterize outcomes in a large cohort of DCD transplantations, identify trends in outcomes over time, and identify factors associated with the development of biliary complications. Design: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of patients receiving DCD liver allografts within a large academic teaching hospital with a high transplantation volume. Consecutive patients who underwent Type III DCD liver transplantation from 2006-2016 were included in our cohort. Re-transplantations and multi-organ transplant recipients were excluded. Results: Ninety-six type III DCD transplantations occurred between 2006-2016. We report a 1one-year patient survival of 90.6% (87) and a 5five-year patient survival of 69.8% (67). Twenty-nine (30.2%) patients experienced any biliary complication in the first year following discharge, with 17 (17.7%) experiencing ischemic cholangiopathy. Five-year patient (P = 0.04) and graft (P = 0.005) survival improved over time. Post-operative biliary complications experienced during index admission and prior to discharge were found to be associated with the development of biliary complications (P = 0.005) and ischemic cholangiopathy (P = 0.01) following discharge. Conclusion: Our data suggested that outcomes using DCD allografts have improved, however biliary complications remain a significant issue in DCD transplantation. Patients who experienced post-operative biliary complications during index admission may require more frequent screening to allow the initiation of earlier treatment for biliary complications.

Temporal Trends in Utilization and Outcomes of DCD Livers in the United States

BACKGROUND

Historically, donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers were frequently discarded because of higher mortality and graft loss after liver transplantation (LT). However, the demand for LT continues to outstrip the supply of "acceptable" organs. Additionally, changes in the donor pool, organ allocation, and clinical management of donors and recipients, and improved clinical protocols might have altered post-DCD-LT outcomes.

METHODS

We studied 5975 recovered DCD livers using US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2005 to 2017, with a comparison group of 78 235 adult donation after brain death (DBD) livers recovered during the same time period. We quantified temporal trends in discard using adjusted multilevel logistic regression and temporal trends in post-LT mortality and graft loss for DCD LT recipients using adjusted Cox regression.

RESULTS

DCD livers were more likely to be discarded than DBD livers across the entire study period, and the relative likelihood of discard increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of discard DCD versus DBD 3.854.455.14 2005-2007, 5.225.876.59 2015-2017) despite improving outcomes after DCD LT. Mortality risk for DCD LTs decreased in each time period (compared with 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.720.840.97, aHR 2012-2014 0.480.580.70, aHR 2015-2017 0.340.430.55), as did risk of graft loss (compared with 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.690.810.94, aHR 2012-2014 0.450.550.67, aHR 2015-2017 0.360.450.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite dramatic improvements in outcomes of DCD LT recipients, DCD livers remain substantially more likely to be discarded than DBD livers, and this discrepancy has actually increased over time. DCD livers are underutilized and have the potential to expand the donor pool.

Safely Expanding the Liver Donor Pool by Utilization of Organs from Donation after Circulatory Death with Comparable Results to Donation After Brain Death, a Large Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Use of livers donated after circulatory death (DCD) is one way to expand the donor pool. Our center has aggressively incorporated use of DCD liver grafts into practice. We examined our center and national outcomes as well as national DCD liver utilization.

METHODS

Liver transplants performed at our center and nationally from 11/2016 through 9/2020 were compared. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival, and national DCD liver utilization.

RESULTS

For our center, DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors were similar except DCD donors were younger (37 vs 40 years; p < 0.05). Recipient Na-MELD (20 vs 24; p < 0.0001) and cold ischemia time (4.63 vs 5.18 h; p < 0.05) were lower in DCD recipients. There were no significant differences in 1-year patient and graft survival between DCD and DBD liver recipients locally. Nationally, there was a difference in 1-year graft survival year (89.4% vs 92.4%, p < 0.0001) but patient survival was similar between groups. The proportion of DCD livers recovered and transplanted widely varied among organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar outcomes for DCD and DBD liver recipients should encourage centers and OPOs nationwide to expand utilization of DCD livers.

Applicability of the UK DCD Risk Score in the modern era of liver transplantation: a U.S. update

Careful graft and recipient selection have resulted in improved outcomes in liver transplantation (LT) using donation after cardiac death (DCD) organs. The UK DCD Risk Score was established as a risk stratification tool to guide selection. We evaluated the applicability of the UK DCD Risk Score in a contemporary US cohort of adult DCD LT recipients using the United Network for Organ Sharing registry (2011-2020). 3,899 DCD LTs were included in our study (UK DCD Risk Score 0-5 points: 1,438 [36.9%], 6-9 points: 1,920 [49.2%]; 10-20 points: 541 [13.9%]). Compared to a score of 6-9 points, a score of 0-5 points was associated with decreased risk of graft loss (HR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.68-0.94, P = 0.006), while a score of 10-20 points was associated with increased risk of graft loss (HR = 1.23, 95%CI: 1.01-1.51, P = 0.04). The 5-year graft survival for patients with risk scores of 0-5, 6-9, and 10-20 were 75.9%, 71.7%, and 67.9%, respectively. The C-statistic for the UK DCD Risk Score in our contemporary cohort was 0.611. The UK DCD Risk Score demonstrates a more limited ability to differentiate recipient outcomes in the modern era of DCD LT in the US. Acceptable long-term outcomes are achievable for patients stratified to the highest-risk group. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Antemortem Heparin in Organ Donation After Circulatory Death Determination: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Donation after circulatory death determination frequently involves antemortem heparin administration to mitigate peri-arrest microvascular thrombosis. We systematically reviewed the literature to: (1) describe heparin administration practices and (2) explore the effects on transplant outcomes. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies reporting donation after circulatory death determination heparin practices including use, dosage, and timing (objective 1). To explore associations between antemortem heparin and transplant outcomes (objective 2), we (1) summarized within-study comparisons and (2) used meta-regression analyses to examine associations between proportions of donors that received heparin and transplant outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and applied the GRADE methodology to determine certainty in the evidence. For objective 1, among 55 eligible studies, 48 reported heparin administration to at least some donors (range: 15.8%-100%) at variable doses (up to 1000 units/kg) and times relative to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. For objective 2, 7 studies that directly compared liver transplants with and without antemortem heparin reported lower rates of primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, graft failure at 5 y, or recipient mortality (low certainty of evidence). In contrast, meta-regression analysis of 32 liver transplant studies detected no associations between the proportion of donors that received heparin and rates of early allograft dysfunction, primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary ischemia, graft failure, retransplantation, or patient survival (very low certainty of evidence). In conclusion, antemortem heparin practices vary substantially with an uncertain effect on transplant outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding antemortem heparin, clinical trials may be warranted.

Biliary complications in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation: the Australian National Liver Transplantation Unit's experience

BACKGROUND

Biliary complications are the most common complications of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation and the international experience with DCD transplants suggests increased rates of biliary complications compared to donation after brain death transplants. Therefore, it is important to understand factors that are associated with the development of biliary complications within the Australian DCD context in order to inform future practice. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of biliary complications after DCD liver transplantation at the Australian National Liver Transplantation Unit and identify factors associated with this outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all adult DCD liver transplants at the Australian National Liver Transplantation Unit from 2007 to 2015 was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of biliary complications and was censored on 31 December 2016. Recipients were then stratified into groups based on the development of biliary complications and risk factor analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Biliary complications occurred in 35% of DCD transplants, including seven anastomotic strictures and 10 non-anastomotic strictures. Higher donor risk index scores (P = 0.03), post-transplant portal vein complications (P = 0.042) and peak gamma-glutamyl transferase levels within 7 days post-transplant (P = 0.047) were associated with biliary complications.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study demonstrate that biliary complications remain common in DCD liver recipients. Recipients who developed a biliary complication tended to have higher donor risk index, elevated peak gamma-glutamyl transferase levels within 7 days post-transplant or a portal vein complication. The presence of any of these factors should prompt close monitoring for post-transplant biliary complications.