Geographic inequities in liver allograft supply and demand: does it affect patient outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Significant geographic inequities mar the distribution of liver allografts for transplantation. METHODS: We analyzed the effect of geographic inequities on patient outcomes. During our study period (January 1 through December 31, 2010), 11,244 adult candidates were listed for liver transplantation: 5,285 adult liver allografts became available, and 5,471 adult recipients underwent transplantation. We obtained population data from the 2010 United States Census. To determine the effect of regional supply and demand disparities on patient outcomes, we performed linear regression and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Our proposed disparity metric, the ratio of listed candidates to liver allografts available varied from 1.3 (region 11) to 3.4 (region 1). When that ratio was used as the explanatory variable, the R(2) values for outcome measures were as follows: 1-year waitlist mortality, 0.23 and 1-year posttransplant survival, 0.27. According to our multivariate analysis, the ratio of listed candidates to liver allografts available had a significant effect on waitlist survival (hazards ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.40) but was not a significant risk factor for posttransplant survival. CONCLUSION: We found significant differences in liver allograft supply and demand--but these differences had only a modest effect on patient outcomes. Redistricting and allocation-sharing schemes should seek to equalize regional supply and demand rather than attempting to equalize patient outcomes.

Early liver retransplantation in adults.

Up to 23% of liver allografts fail post-transplant. Retransplantation is only the recourse but remains controversial due to inferior outcomes. The objective of our study was to identify high-risk periods for retransplantation and then compare survival outcomes and risk factors. We performed an analysis of United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data for all adult liver recipients from 2002 through 2011. We analyzed the records of 49,288 recipients; of those, 2714 (5.5%) recipients were retransplanted. Our analysis included multivariate regression with the outcome of retransplantation. The highest retransplantation rates were within the first week (19% of all retransplantation, day 0-7), month (20%, day 8-30), and year (33%, day 31-365). Only retransplantation within the first year (day 0-365) had below standard outcomes. The most significant risk factors were as follows: within the first week, cold ischemia time >16 h [odds ratio (OR) 3.6]; within the first month, use of split allografts (OR 2.9); and within the first year, use of a liver donated after cardiac death (OR 4.9). Each of the three high-risk periods within the first year had distinct causes of graft failure, risk factors for retransplantation, and survival rates after retransplantation.

A critical analysis of early death after adult liver transplants.

INTRODUCTION: The 15% mortality rate of liver transplant recipients at one yr may be viewed as a feat in comparison with the waiting list mortality, yet it nonetheless leaves room for much improvement. Our aim was to critically examine the mortality rates to identify high-risk periods and to incorporate cause of death into the analysis of post-transplant survival. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on United Network for Organ Sharing data for all adult recipients of liver transplants from January 1, 2002 to October 31, 2011. Our analysis included multivariate logistic regression where the primary outcome measure was patient death of 49,288 recipients. RESULTS: The highest mortality rate by day post-transplant was on day 0 (0.9%). The most significant risk factors were as follows: for one-d mortality from technical failure, intensive care unit admission odds ratio (OR 3.2); for one-d mortality from graft failure, warm ischemia >75 min (OR 5.6); for one-month mortality from infection, a previous transplant (OR 3.3); and for one-month mortality from graft failure, a previous transplant (OR 3.7). CONCLUSION: We found that the highest mortality rate after liver transplantation is within the first day and the first month post-transplant. Those two high-risk periods have common, as well as different, risk factors for mortality.

The survival outcomes following liver transplantation (SOFT) score: validation with contemporaneous data and stratification of high-risk cohorts.

Models to project survival after liver transplantation are important to optimize outcomes. We introduced the survival outcomes following liver transplantation (SOFT) score in 2008 (1) and designed to predict survival in liver recipients at three months post-transplant with a C statistic of 0.70. Our objective was to validate the SOFT score, with more contemporaneous data from the OPTN database. We also applied the SOFT score to cohorts of the sickest transplant candidates and the poorest-quality allografts. Analysis included 21 949 patients transplanted from August 1, 2006, to October 1, 2010. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were used for time-to-event analysis. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. We validated the SOFT score in this cohort of 21 949 liver recipients. The C statistic was 0.70 (CI 0.68-0.71), identical to the original analysis. When applied to cohorts of high-risk recipients and poor-quality donor allografts, the SOFT score projected survival with a C statistic between 0.65 and 0.74. In this study, a validated SOFT score was informative among cohorts of the sickest transplant candidates and the poorest-quality allografts.

Pancreas transplantation after bariatric surgery.

Obese transplant candidates are at increased risk for perioperative and postoperative complications. In many transplant programs, morbid obesity is considered to be an exclusion criterion for transplantation. The only potential option that would grant these patients access to transplant is weight loss. Non-operative weight loss strategies such as behavioral modifications, exercise, diet, or medication have only very limited success in achieving long-term weight loss. In contrast, bariatric surgery was shown to achieve not only more excessive weight loss, but more importantly, this weight loss can be sustained for longer periods of time. Therefore, bariatric surgery presents an attractive option for weight loss for morbidly obese transplant candidates. We report our experience with four patients who underwent bariatric surgery prior to successful pancreas transplantation. Even though gastric bypass and laparoscopic adjustable gastric band present as equivalent alternatives for weight reduction, we believe that in the population of morbidly obese diabetic patients who are possible candidates for pancreas transplantation, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band placement is the more suitable procedure.

Adult living-donor liver transplantation with ABO-incompatible grafts.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation using ABO-incompatible grafts is rarely performed because the reported outcome is poorer than with compatible grafts. We report our positive experience with adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) using ABO-incompatible grafts. METHODS: The immunosuppressive protocol consisted of plasmapheresis/intravenous immunoglobulin infusion before LDLT followed by thymoglobulin induction and splenectomy, maintenance with tacrolimus/cyclosporine (FK/CSA), mycophenolate mofetil, and a rapid steroid taper. Plasmapheresis was planned for up to 3 months after LDLT aiming at maintaining the anti-ABO titers level below 1:16. Liver biopsies were routinely stained for humoral rejection with complement 4d (C4d) and for biliary damage with cytokeratin 7. RESULTS: Between January 2003 and September 2004, five patients, mean age 59 years, received an ABO-incompatible LDLT. Patient and graft survival was 80% at mean follow-up of 43 months (range, 34-54) for the four surviving patients. One patient died 4 months after LDLT. Humoral rejection occurred in one patient whereas acute cellular rejection was diagnosed in four patients. CONCLUSIONS: ABO-incompatible LDLT can be performed with patient and graft survival similar to compatible LDLT. Minimization of immunosuppression is possible, and chronic biliary damage is not the norm. Better tools than complement 4d staining must be researched to diagnose the features of immunologic damage to the graft. If these results will be confirmed in a greater number of patients, ABO-incompatible LDLT may be proposed when ABO-compatible donors are not available or when the ABO-incompatible donor is the better candidate.

Reconstruction of two bile ducts in a cloaca fashion in living donor liver transplantation.

The presence of two or more hepatic ducts for biliary anastomosis in adult-to-adult right liver transplantation is not uncommon. In the case described here, the graft had two hepatic ducts: one corresponded anatomically to a normal right hepatic duct and the other ran parallel to the proper hepatic duct and drained into its distal to the cystic duct. Because of the small diameter of both duct orifices and the favorable length of the ducts, a cloaca type reconstruction was performed. This allowed the construction of a single and larger orifice for the biliary anastomosis. In case of multiple hepatic ducts of smaller caliber, this technique represents a practical and effective hepatoplasty allowing a single larger anastomosis in the recipient.

Hilar early division of the hepatic duct in living donor right hepatectomy: the probe-and-clamp technique.

The division of the hepatic duct is one of the most challenging passages of the donor hepatectomy. We report our experience with the early division, prior to the liver parenchyma resection, of the hepatic duct and the definition of the biliary anatomy with a probe inserted in the proper hepatic duct. From February 2002 to December 2004, 40 donors (25 male, 15 female; mean age 34, range 20-57) underwent right hepatectomy. The yield was a single duct in 24 donors (60%), two ducts in 12 donors (30%), and three ducts in one donor (2.5%), and three donors had aberrant anatomy yielding two ducts (7.5%). By means of a ductoplasty, a single orifice for the recipient biliary anastomosis was obtained in 77.5% of the cases. Three donors (7.5%) suffered a resection surface bile leak. The technique of hepatic duct probing and early division provides a precise definition of the biliary anatomy and facilitates one of the most challenging passages of the donor hepatectomy. This technique should also contribute to maximizing the preservation of the vascular supply of the hepatic duct and the yield of a single orifice for the recipient anastomosis. At a median follow-up of 21 months (range 10-44), neither short- nor long-term complications had been caused by the small donor choledochotomy.

Pattern of growth after pediatric living-donor small bowel transplantation.

The aim of our study was to analyze growth in children who underwent LDSB. The question was whether these children obtain linear growth and improvement of the Z-score for height and weight after the transplant. Three children with a mean age of 24 months underwent living-donor intestinal transplantation with 150 cm of terminal ileum. At a mean follow-up of 27 months height increased from 82.5 to 97.5 cm although Z-score for height did not improve, -2.679 to -2.675. Mean weight increased from 11.4 to 14.2 kg while Z-score for weight went from -1.916 to -2.409. Although these data are pertinent to only three children and the follow-up is slightly longer than two yr, it appears that while long-term survival and independency from TPN is achieved, only linear growth might be expected and catch-up growth does not occur.