Single-center experience of liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, curative resection was considered the cornerstone of treatment for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. More recently, liver transplantation (LT) offered an alternative for patients with unresectable disease. The purpose of this study was to assess our experience with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and LT. METHODS: A perihilar cholangiocarcinoma protocol was commenced in 2006 whereby diagnosed patients were enrolled onto an institutional registry for LT consideration. Data on patient progression and oncologic outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were initially enrolled onto the protocol and 38 proceeded to LT following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (mean age 55.6 ± 11.4 years). Mean time to LT was 3.7 ± 2 months and, among those transplanted, 14 (37%) had underlying primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Thirteen (34%) patients developed malignant recurrence and there were no differences in disease recurrence between PSC (n = 3) and non-PSC (n = 10) patients (p = 0.32). Overall patient survival was 91%, 58% and 52% at 1-, 3- and 5-years corresponding with 81%, 52% and 46% graft survival, respectively. CONCLUSION: Rigorous patient selection and chemoradiation treatment algorithms can be highly effective in treating perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. For appropriately selected candidates, LT can provide a 52% 5-year survival for patients who would otherwise have no surgical treatment option.

Domino liver transplants: where do we stand after a quarter-century? A US national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes a phenotypically normal explant from select recipients as a donor graft in another patient. The procedure is not widely employed and remains restricted to a small number of centers. The purpose of this study was to assess the national profile of DLT in the United States (US) and evaluate current survival outcomes. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was queried for all liver transplants (LT) between 1996 and 2020. Outcomes of interest were long-term graft and patient survival. RESULTS: Of 181,976 LTs performed nationally during the study period, 185 (0.1%) were DLTs. Amyloidosis and maple syrup urine disease (MSUD) accounted for 83% of dominoed allografts. Out of 210 explants with amyloidosis, 103 (49%) were dominoed into secondary recipients. Only 50 (22%) of all MSUD explants (n = 227) were dominoed. Graft survival was 79%, 73% and 53% at 3-, 5- and 10-years, respectively, for DLT recipients. Overall patient survival was 83%, 76% and 57% at 3-, 5- and 10-years. CONCLUSION: Despite excellent long-term survival outcomes, DLT allografts comprise a very small percentage of the liver donor pool. A large proportion of potential DLTs may be unconscionably excluded despite shortages in deceased donor organs.

Liver transplantation: expanding the donor and recipient pool.

Liver transplantation is an exemplar model of complex surgery and the only curative option for patients with end-stage liver disease. Although historically associated with poor outcomes, liver cancer management has also been revolutionised with liver transplantation and in some instances, survival outcomes are comparable to surgical resection. As such, the key elements underpinning the major advances in surgical technique, immunological therapies and allocation policies combined with improved patient and graft survival outcomes have created a huge demand for organ donation. Despite improvements in donor and recipient selection, there is a persistent disparity between organ supply and demand. Candidate wait-list mortality and dropout rates remain problematic and this concern has resulted in increased efforts to expand the donor pool to meet the unmet needs of the population. This is even more challenging when coupled with an ever-growing recipient pool, candidate waiting lists and an ageing population. Over the past two decades, there has been a considerable focus on extended criteria organs, donations after cardiac death and alternative avenues for marginal liver use. With careful donor selection and recipient matching, these livers may help bridge the gap between supply and demand and placate the ever-expanding recipient pool. Here, we present a summary of recent developments by the transplant community addressing the issues of a growing donor and recipient pool.

Organ donation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a rapidly changing circumstance with dramatic policy changes and universal efforts to deal with the initial crisis and minimize its consequences. To identify changes to organ donation and transplantation during this time, an anonymous web-based survey was distributed to 19 select organ procurement organizations (OPOs) throughout the United States comparing 90-day activity during March-May 2020 and March-May 2019. Seventeen OPOs responded to the survey (response rate of 89.5%). Organ authorization decreased by 11% during the current pandemic (n = 1379 vs n = 1552, P = .0001). Organ recovery for transplantation fell by 17% (P = .0001) with a further 18% decrease in the number of organs transplanted (P = .0001). Donor cause of death demonstrated a 4.5% decline in trauma but a 35% increase in substance abuse cases during the COVID-19 period. All OPOs reported significant modifications in response to the pandemic, limiting the onsite presence of staff and transitioning to telephonic approaches for donor family correspondence. Organ donation during the current climate has seen significant changes and the long-term implications of such shifts remain unclear. These trends during the COVID-19 era warrant further investigation to address unmet needs, plan for a proportionate response to the virus and mitigate the collateral impact.

Surgical Considerations of Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma.

Cholangiocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy of the extrahepatic bile ducts. Hilar lesions are most common. Patients present with obstructive jaundice and intrahepatic bile duct dilation. Cross-sectional imaging reveals local, regional, and distant extent of disease, with direct cholangiography providing tissue for diagnosis. The consensus of a multidisciplinary committee dictates treatment. Resection of the extrahepatic bile duct and ipsilateral hepatic lobe with or without vascular resection and transplantation after neoadjuvant protocol are options for curative treatment. The goal of surgery is to remove the tumor with negative margins. Patients with inoperable tumors or metastatic disease are best served with palliative chemoradiotherapy.

Mini-incision versus hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in living-donor kidney transplantation: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing use of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation (LDKT) would decrease the discrepancy between patients awaiting transplantation and organ availability. Minimally invasive surgical approaches attempt to improve outcomes and foster living donation. This report compares outcomes of open minimal incision nephrectomy (Mini N) and a hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALN). METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained clinical database of LDKT using HALN or Mini N at a single institution between July 2007 and December 2015. Donor and recipient demographics, relevant pre-, intra- and post-operative factors, outcomes such as patient and graft survival rates, and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-four adult LDKT (243 Mini N, 211 HALN) were performed during the study period. Recipient and donor demographics were comparable except for higher BMI (p = 0.027) in HALN donors. One-, 3- and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were comparable. Six HALN donors experienced infectious wound complications or superficial skin dehiscence; none did in the Mini N group (p = 0.009). Eight HALN donors and one Mini N donor required an incisional hernia repair (p = 0.014). Recipients had similar warm ischemia times (33 v. 35 min, p = 0.491), but recipient surgeons of HALN nephrectomies subjectively noted higher anastomotic difficulty (10.4% v. 4.5%, p = 0.0183). Other parameters were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Both Mini N and HALN provide similar long term recipient and donor outcomes. Offering techniques such as Mini N and HALN for living donor kidney procurement facilitates the opportunity to provide living donors safer and better tolerated nephrectomy procedures.

Assessment and optimization of liver volume before major hepatic resection: Current guidelines and a narrative review.

Post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after major liver resection. Although the etiology of PHLF is multifactorial, an inadequate functional liver remnant (FLR) is felt to be the most important modifiable predictor of PHLF. Pre-operative evaluation of FLR function and volume is of paramount importance before proceeding with any major liver resection. Patients with inadequate or borderline FLR volume must be considered for volume optimization strategies such as portal vein embolization (PVE), two stage hepatectomy with portal vein ligation (PVL), Yttrium-90 radioembolization, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS). This paper provides an overview of assessing FLR volume and function, and discusses indications and outcomes of commonly used volume optimization strategies.

Optimal extent of surgical and pathologic lymph node evaluation for resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lymph node (LN) status is an important predictor of overall survival for resected IHCC, yet guidelines for the extent of LN dissection are not evidence-based. We evaluated whether the number of LNs resected at the time of surgery is associated with overall survival for IHCC. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative-intent (R0 or R1) resection for IHCC between 2004 and 2012 were identified within the US National Cancer Database. LN thresholds were evaluated using maximal chi-square testing and five-year overall survival was modeled using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regressions. RESULTS: 57% (n = 1,132) of 2,000 patients had one or more LNs resected and pathologically examined. In the 631 patients undergoing R0 resection with pN0 disease, maximal chi-square testing identified ≥3 LNs as the threshold most closely associated with overall survival. Only 39% of resections reached this threshold. On multivariable survival analysis, no threshold of LNs was associated with overall survival, including ≥3 LNs (p = 0.186) and the current American Joint Committee on Cancer recommendation of ≥6 LNs (p = 0.318). CONCLUSION: In determining the extent of lymphadenectomy at the time of curative-intent resection for IHCC, surgeons should carefully consider the prognostic yield in the absence of overall survival benefit.

Surgeon Variation in Intraoperative Supply Cost for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Is Intraoperative Supply Cost Associated with Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: With increased scrutiny on the quality and cost of health care, surgeons must be mindful of their outcomes and resource use. We evaluated surgeon-specific intraoperative supply cost (ISC) for pancreaticoduodenectomy and examined whether ISC was associated with patient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2012 and March 2015 were included. Outcomes were tracked prospectively through postoperative day 90, and ISC was defined as the facility cost of single-use surgical items and instruments, plus facility charges for multiuse equipment. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test associations between ISC and patient outcomes using repeated measures at the surgeon level. RESULTS: There were 249 patients who met inclusion criteria. Median ISC was $1,882 (interquartile range [IQR] $1,497 to $2,281). Case volume for 6 surgeons ranged from 18 to 66. Median surgeon-specific ISC ranged from $1,496 to $2,371. Greater case volume was associated with decreased ISC (p < 0.001). Overall, ISC was not predictive of postoperative complications (p = 0.702) or total hospitalization expenditures (p = 0.195). At the surgeon level, surgeon-specific ISC was not associated with the surgeon-specific incidence of severe complication or any wound infection (p > 0.227 for both), but was associated with delayed gastric emptying (p = 0.004) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a single-institution cohort of 249 pancreaticoduodenectomies, high-volume surgeons tended to be low-cost surgeons. Across the cohort, ISC was not associated with outcomes. At the surgeon level, associations were noted between ISC and complications, but these may be attributable to unmeasured differences in the postoperative management of patients. These findings suggest that quality improvement efforts to restructure resource use toward more cost-effective practice may not affect patient outcomes, although prospective monitoring of safety and effectiveness must be of the utmost concern.

Liver Transplantation for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Downstaging Without Up-Front Stage Restrictions.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) continues to increase dramatically worldwide. Liver transplantation (LT) is now the standard and optimal treatment for patients with HCC in the setting of cirrhosis, but only for tumors within Milan criteria. In patients presenting beyond Milan criteria, locoregional therapy (LRT) can downstage to within Milan criteria for consideration for LT. Although controversial, the current study aims to evaluate the outcomes of LT in patients presenting with advanced-stage HCC who underwent downstaging and compare these outcomes with those of patients who met Milan criteria at presentation. STUDY DESIGN: Our protocol does not set a priori limitations as long as HCC is confined to the liver. In this retrospective study between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2014, we reviewed outcomes associated with 284 patients who presented within Milan criteria and patients who presented with more-advanced stage tumor who were potential transplantation candidates. The patients with advanced disease were then subdivided into those who were within or beyond University of California San Francisco criteria. Imaging, details of LRT, recurrence, and survival were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Sixty-three of 210 (30%) eligible patients were downstaged and underwent transplantation; 14 additional downstaged and listed patients were withdrawn for the following reasons: death while waiting (n = 4), disease progression (n = 8), development of other malignancy (n = 1), and declined LT (n = 1). Twelve patients underwent resection after downstaging and did not require LT. Survival for patients who were downstaged was similar to those who were within Milan criteria initially. Recurrence of HCC at 5 years was similar between groups (10.9% vs 10.8%; p = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with beyond-Milan criteria HCC who are otherwise candidates for LT should undergo aggressive attempts at downstaging without a priori exclusion. This highly selective approach allows for excellent long-term results, similar to patients presenting with earlier-stage disease.

Operative Site Drainage after Hepatectomy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Targeted Hepatectomy Database.

BACKGROUND: Operative site drainage (OSD) after elective hepatectomy remains widely used despite data suggesting limited benefit. Multi-institutional, quality-driven databases and analytic techniques offer a unique source from which the utility of OSD can be assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Elective hepatectomies from the 2014 American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP Targeted Hepatectomy Database were propensity score matched on the use of OSD using preoperative and intraoperative variables. The influence of OSD on the diagnosis of postoperative bile leaks, rates of subsequent intervention, and other outcomes within 30 days were assessed using paired testing. RESULTS: Operative site drainage was used in 42.2% of 2,583 eligible hepatectomies. There were 1,868 cases matched, with 7.2% experiencing a post-hepatectomy bile leak. The incidence of bile leak initially requiring intervention was no different between the OSD and no OSD groups (n = 32 vs n = 24, p = 0.278), and OSD was associated with a greater number of drainage procedures to manage post-hepatectomy bile leak (n = 27 in the OSD group, n = 13 in the no OSD group, p = 0.034, relative risk [RR] 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.0]). The OSD group had a greater mean length of stay (+0.8 days, p = 0.004) and more 30-day readmissions (p < 0.001, RR 1.6 [95% CI 1.2 to 2.1]). On multivariate analysis, post-hepatectomy bile leak and receipt of additional drainage procedures were stronger predictors of increased length of stay and readmissions than OSD. CONCLUSIONS: In a propensity score matched cohort, OSD did not improve the rate of diagnosis of major bile leaks and was associated with increased interventions, greater length of stay, and more 30-day readmissions. These data suggest that routine OSD after elective hepatectomy may not be helpful in capturing clinically relevant bile leaks and has additional consequences.

Results of Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Transplantation: A Single-Center Review.

BACKGROUND: The decision for a simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation (SLKT) is fraught with controversy. The aim of this study was to compare SLKT with liver transplantation alone (LTA) in patients with pretransplantation renal failure. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review comparing patients undergoing SLKT and LTA (with renal failure) between January 2000 and December 2014 was performed. RESULTS: Of 1,129 liver transplantations, 132 had renal failure pretransplantation; 52 had SLKT and 80 recipients had LTA. Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score and BMI were lower in the SLKT group (p = 0.001). Simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation patients had better overall survival rates at 1 and 5 years compared with LTA (92.3% and 81.6% vs 73.3% and 64.3% respectively; p < 0.01). Graft survival was also superior in patients undergoing SLKT vs LTA. Six of 52 (11.5%) SLKT patients had final positive cross match, but only 1 of 52 (1.9%) kidney grafts was lost to rejection. In the SLKT group, 9 of 52 (17.3%) patients required dialysis post transplantation, but only 2 remained on dialysis beyond 30 days. All patients in the LTA group were on dialysis pretransplantation and significantly more patients (52 of 80 [65%]) required dialysis post LTA (p ≤ 0.0001); 31 of 80 (38.8%) were dialysis dependent for more than 30 days or died on dialysis within 30 days. Two LTA recipients were subsequently listed for kidney transplant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with end-stage liver disease on dialysis who undergo liver transplantation have significantly better survival when SLKT is performed. In selected patients, SLKT is an appropriate use of a scarce resource, but better prognostic indicators for selection of patients are still needed.

Consensus Conference on North American Training in Hepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery: A Review of the Conference and Presentation of Consensus Statements.

The findings and recommendations of the North American consensus conference on training in hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery held in October 2014 are presented. The conference was hosted by the Society for Surgical Oncology (SSO), the Americas Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Association (AHPBA), and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS). The current state of training in HPB surgery in North America was defined through three pathways-HPB, surgical oncology, and solid organ transplant fellowships. Consensus regarding programmatic requirements included establishment of minimum case volumes and inclusion of quality metrics. Formative assessment, using milestones as a framework and inclusive of both operative and nonoperative skills, must be present. Specific core HPB cases should be defined and used for evaluation of operative skills. The conference concluded with a focus on the optimal means to perform summative assessment to evaluate the individual fellow completing a fellowship in HPB surgery. Presentations from the hospital perspective and the American Board of Surgery led to consensus that summative assessment was desired by the public and the hospital systems and should occur in a uniform but possibly modular manner for all HPB fellowship pathways. A task force composed of representatives of the SSO, AHPBA, and ASTS are charged with implementation of the consensus statements emanating from this consensus conference.

Biphenotypic Primary Liver Carcinomas: Assessing Outcomes of Hepatic Directed Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Primary liver carcinomas with hepatocellular and cholangiocellular differentiation (b[HB]-PLC) are rare. Surgery offers the best prognosis, but there is a paucity of literature to guide therapy for patients with advanced or unresectable disease. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of hepatic-directed therapy compared with those of systemic chemotherapy and surgery. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of patients with b(HB)-PLC from 1 January 2008 to 1 September 2014 was conducted. The patients were divided into the following four groups: transplantation (TX) group, surgical resection (SX) group, hepatic directed (HD) group, and systemic chemotherapy alone (SC) group. Overall and progression-free survival, treatment response, and clinicopathologic data were analyzed. RESULTS: The study included 79 patients (37 females) with an average age of 62 years. The number of patients in each group were as follows: TX group (n = 6), SX group (n = 27), HD group (n = 18), and SC group (n = 28). The mean follow-up periods were 33 months for the TX group, 17 months for the SX group, 14 months for the HD group, and 7 months for the SX group. Overall, 28 % of the patients had cirrhosis and 35 % had viral hepatitis. The candidates for surgery comprised 42 % of the patients. The HD group (n = 18) had a significantly greater objective response than the SC group (n = 28) (47 vs. 6 %; p = 0.02). Two patients who underwent hepatic arterial infusion pump treatment were downstaged to resection. A trend toward improved OS/PFS was observed in the HD group versus the SC group, although statistically significant. The SX group had significantly improved survival (p < 0.001) as did the transplanted patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although surgery offers the best survival for b(HB)-PLC patients, only a minority are candidates for surgery. Because HD therapy showed a superior objective response over SC therapy, it may offer a survival advantage and may downstage patients for surgical resection or transplantation.

Outcomes Using Grafts from Donors after Cardiac Death.

BACKGROUND: Previous reports suggest that donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver grafts have increased primary nonfunction (PNF) and cholangiopathy thought to be due to the graft warm ischemia before cold flushing. STUDY DESIGN: In this single-center, retrospective study, 866 adult liver transplantations were performed at our institution from January 2005 to August 2014. Forty-nine (5.7%) patients received DCD donor grafts. The 49 DCD graft recipients were compared with all recipients of donation after brain death donor (DBD) grafts and to a donor and recipient age- and size-matched cohort. RESULTS: The DCD donors were younger (age 28, range 8 to 60 years) than non-DCD (age 44.3, range 9 to 80 years) (p < 0.0001), with similar recipient age. The mean laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) was lower in DCD recipients (18.7 vs 22.2, p = 0.03). Mean cold and warm ischemia times were similar. Median ICU and hospital stay were 2 days and 7.5 days in both groups (p = 0.37). Median follow-ups were 4.0 and 3.4 years, respectively. Long-term outcomes were similar between groups, with similar 1-, 3- and 5-year patient and graft survivals (p = 0.59). Four (8.5%) recipients developed ischemic cholangiopathy (IC) at 2, 3, 6, and 8 months. Primary nonfunction and hepatic artery thrombosis did not occur in any patient in the DCD group. Acute kidney injury was more common with DCD grafts (16.3% of DCD recipients required dialysis vs 4.1% of DBD recipients, p = 0.01). An increased donor age (>40 years) was shown to increase the risk of IC (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Careful selection of DCD donors can provide suitable donors, with results of liver transplantation comparable to those with standard brain dead donors.

Donor Age-Based Analysis of Liver Transplantation Outcomes: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Are Similar Regardless of Donor Age.

BACKGROUND: The shortage of donor organs has led to increasing use of extended criteria donors, including older donors. The upper limit of donor age that produces acceptable outcomes continues to be explored. In liver transplantation, with appropriate selection, graft survival and patient outcomes would be comparable regardless of age. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of 1,036 adult orthotopic liver transplantations (OLT) from a prospectively maintained database performed between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2013. The study focus group was liver transplantations performed using grafts from older (older than 60 years) deceased donors. Deceased donor liver transplantations done during the same time period using grafts from younger donors (younger than 60 years) were analyzed for comparison. Both groups were further divided based on recipient age (less than 60 years and 60 years or older). Donor age was the primary variable. Recipient variables included were demographics, indication for transplantation, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), graft survival, and patient survival. Operative details and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Patient demographics and perioperative details were similar between groups. Patient and graft survival rates were similar in the 4 groups. Rates of rejection (p = 0.07), bile leak (p = 0.17), and hepatic artery thrombosis were comparable across all groups (p = 0.84). Hepatitis C virus recurrence was similar across all groups (p = 0.10). Thirty-one young recipients (less than 60 years) received grafts from donors aged 70 or older. Their survival and other complication rates were comparable to those in the young donor to young recipient group. CONCLUSIONS: Comparable outcomes in graft and patient survivals were achieved using older donors (60 years or more), regardless of recipient age, without increased rate of complications.

Morbid obesity in liver transplant recipients adversely affects longterm graft and patient survival in a single-institution analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of obesity in liver transplantation remain controversial. Earlier institutional data demonstrated no significant difference in postoperative complications or 1-year mortality. This study was conducted to test the hypothesis that obesity alone has minimal effect on longterm graft and overall survival. METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution analysis of outcomes in patients submitted to primary adult orthotopic liver transplantation was conducted using data for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2012. Recipients were divided into six groups by pre-transplant body mass index (BMI), comprising those with BMIs of <18.0 kg/m(2) , 18.0-24.9 kg/m(2) , 25.0-29.9 kg/m(2) , 30.0-35.0 kg/m(2) , 35.1-40.0 kg/m(2) and >40 kg/m(2) , respectively. Pre- and post-transplant parameters were compared. A P-value of <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. Independent predictors of patient and graft survival were determined using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 785 patients met the study inclusion criteria. A BMI of >35 kg/m(2) was associated with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) cirrhosis (P < 0.0001), higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, and longer wait times for transplant (P = 0.002). There were no differences in operative time, intensive care unit or hospital length of stay, or perioperative complications. Graft and patient survival at intervals up to 3 years were similar between groups. Compared with non-obese recipients, recipients with a BMI of >40 kg/m(2) showed significantly reduced 5-year graft (49.0% versus 75.8%; P < 0.02) and patient (51.3% versus 78.8%; P < 0.01) survival. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity increasingly impacts outcomes in liver transplantation. Although the present data are limited by the fact that they were sourced from a single institution, they suggest that morbid obesity adversely affects longterm outcomes despite providing similar short-term results. Further analysis is indicated to identify risk factors for poor outcomes in morbidly obese patients.

A novel organ donor facility: a decade of experience with liver donors.

Transplant surgeons have historically traveled to donor hospitals, performing complex, time-sensitive procedures with unfamiliar personnel. This often involves air travel, significant delays, and frequently occurs overnight.In 2001, we established the nation's first organ recovery center. The goal was to increase efficiency,reduce costs and reduce surgeon travel. Liver donors and recipients, donor costs, surgeon hours and travel time, from April 1,2001 through December 31,2011 were analyzed. Nine hundred and fifteen liver transplants performed at our center were analyzed based on procurement location (living donors and donation after cardiac death donors were excluded). In year 1, 36% (9/25) of donor procurements occurred at the organ procurement organization (OPO) facility, rising to 93%(56/60) in the last year of analysis. Travel time was reduced from 8 to 2.7 h (p<0.0001), with a reduction of surgeon fly outs by 93% (14/15) in 2011. Liver organ donor charges generated by the donor were reduced by37% overall for donors recovered at the OPO facility versus acute care hospital. Organs recovered in this novel facility resulted in significantly reduced surgeon hours, air travel and cost. This practice has major implications for cost containment and OPO national policy and could become the standard of care.