Successful Surgical Management of Giant Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm of Liver (MCN-L) Presenting With Peritoneal Rupture and Biliary Prolapse: Case Report and Review of Literature.

Mucinous cystic neoplasms of liver (MCN-L) are generally considered benign indolent cystic liver lesions, not associated with significant clinical symptoms in majority of patients. However, rarely these benign-appearing lesions may have a complicated clinical course, presenting with jaundice, acute abdomen, or malignant transformation. We report one such rare clinical presentation of MCN-L presenting with obstructive jaundice and abdominal pain due to prolapse of cystic component in biliary system and peritoneal rupture occurring simultaneously. Despite the complex nature of presentation, it was successfully managed surgically with normal follow-up imaging.

APASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of acute kidney injury in acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a syndrome that is characterized by the rapid development of organ failures predisposing these patients to a high risk of short-term early death. The main causes of organ failure in these patients are bacterial infections and systemic inflammation, both of which can be severe. For the majority of these patients, a prompt liver transplant is still the only effective course of treatment. Kidneys are one of the most frequent extrahepatic organs that are affected in patients with ACLF, since acute kidney injury (AKI) is reported in 22.8-34% of patients with ACLF. Approach and management of kidney injury could improve overall outcomes in these patients. Importantly, patients with ACLF more frequently have stage 3 AKI with a low rate of response to the current treatment modalities. The objective of the present position paper is to critically review and analyze the published data on AKI in ACLF, evolve a consensus, and provide recommendations for early diagnosis, pathophysiology, prevention, and management of AKI in patients with ACLF. In the absence of direct evidence, we propose expert opinions for guidance in managing AKI in this very challenging group of patients and focus on areas of future research. This consensus will be of major importance to all hepatologists, liver transplant surgeons, and intensivists across the globe.

Basics and Art of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation.

Liver transplantation is one of the most challenging areas in the medical field. Despite that, it has already been established as a standard treatment option, especially in decompensated cirrhosis and selected cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and acute liver failure. Complications due to graft rejection, including mortality and morbidity, have greatly improved over time due to better immunosuppressive agents and management protocols. Currently, immunosuppression in liver transplant patients makes use of the best possible combinations of effective agents to achieve optimal immunosuppression for long-term graft survival. Induction agents are no longer used routinely, and the aim is to provide minimal immunosuppression in the maintenance phase. Currently available immunosuppressive agents are mainly classified as biological and pharmacological agents. Though the protocols may vary among the centers and over time, the basics of effective use usually remain similar. Most protocols use the combination of multiple agents with different mechanisms of action to reduce the dose and minimize the side effects. Along with the improvement in operative and perioperative techniques, this art of immunosuppression has contributed to the recent progress made in the outcomes of liver transplants. In this review, we will discuss the various types of immunosuppressive agents currently in use, the different protocols of immunosuppression used, and the art of optimal use for achieving maximum immunosuppression without increasing toxicity. We will also discuss the practical aspects of various immunosuppression regimens, including drug monitoring, and briefly discuss the concepts of immunosuppression minimization and withdrawal.

Living donor liver transplant in acute on chronic liver failure grade 3: Who not to transplant.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Liver transplantation(LT)offers definitive treatment for acute on chronic liver failure(ACLF) patients. This study was done to analyze and compare the outcomes of living donor LT(LDLT) in patients with ACLF versus Chronic liver disease(CLD) and within the grades of ACLF. Factors affecting mortality in patients with ACLF and ACLF grade3 (ACLF3) following LDLT were also derived. METHODS: Records of adult LDLT between 1/2/2017 and 30/9/2021 were analyzed. ACLF was classified based on EASL-CLIF definition. Post-transplant outcomes of ACLF were compared with CLD and within ACLF grades. Post LDLT mortality predictors were identified in ACLF and ACLF3 patients. RESULTS: Out of 853 patients who had LT in that period; 704 patients with CLD and 103 with ACLF [of which 54 (52.42%) had ACLF3] underwent LDLT. The one month and one-year post LDLT mortality was 8.81% and 9.80% in CLD; 19.42% and 31.06% in ACLF; and 25.92% and 38.89% in ACLF3 respectively. On log regression analysis, use of grafts from older donors and pre-operative respiratory failure in recipients was associated with poor survival in ACLF, while respiratory failure was a predictor of poor survival in ACLF3 following LDLT. CONCLUSION: Outcomes following LDLT are poorer in ACLF as compared to after CLD. Higher donor age and preoperative respiratory failure with PF Ratio<200 were associated with poor survival post LDLT in ACLF and ACLF3.

Long Term Complications of Immunosuppression Post Liver Transplant.

Improvement in immunosuppression has led to a remarkable improvement in short-term and long-term outcomes post-liver transplant (LT). However, with improvements in long-term survival, complications related to immunosuppressive drugs, either directly or indirectly, have also increased. The adverse events could be drug-specific, class-specific, or generic. Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine and tacrolimus) are the backbone of the immunosuppression after LT and the main culprit associated with most of the complications, including renal failure, post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), and metabolic syndrome. Steroids are also implicated in the development of diabetes, osteoporosis, and metabolic syndrome post-LT. The development of infections and de novo malignancies (DNMs) is a generic effect linked to the overall cumulative immunosuppression. The development of these complications significantly hampers the quality of life and leads to increased morbidity and mortality post-LT. Thus, it is important to minimize the cumulative immunosuppression dose while simultaneously preventing allograft rejection. This review provides up-to-date, comprehensive knowledge of the complications of long-term immunosuppression post-LT along with associated risk factors and strategies to minimize the risk of complications.

Anesthesia and Critical Care for the Prediction and Prevention for Small-for-size Syndrome: Guidelines from the ILTS-iLDLT-LTSI Consensus Conference.

BACKGROUND: During the perioperative period of living donor liver transplantation, anesthesiologists and intensivists may encounter patients in receipt of small grafts that puts them at risk of developing small for size syndrome (SFSS). METHODS: A scientific committee (106 members from 21 countries) performed an extensive literature review on aspects of SFSS with proposed recommendations. Recommendations underwent a blinded review by an independent expert panel and discussion/voting on the recommendations occurred at a consensus conference organized by the International Liver Transplantation Society, International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group, and Liver Transplantation Society of India. RESULTS: It was determined that centers with experience in living donor liver transplantation should utilize potential small for size grafts. Higher risk recipients with sarcopenia, cardiopulmonary, and renal dysfunction should receive small for size grafts with caution. In the intraoperative phase, a restrictive fluid strategy should be considered along with routine use of cardiac output monitoring, as well as use of pharmacologic portal flow modulation when appropriate. Postoperatively, these patients can be considered for enhanced recovery and should receive proactive monitoring for SFSS, nutrition optimization, infection prevention, and consideration for early renal replacement therapy for avoidance of graft congestion. CONCLUSIONS: Our recommendations provide a framework for the optimal anesthetic and critical care management in the perioperative period for patients with grafts that put them at risk of developing SFSS. There is a significant limitation in the level of evidence for most recommendations. This statement aims to provide guidance for future research in the perioperative management of SFSS.

Strategies for ABO Incompatible Liver Transplantation.

Liver transplantation (LT) is a definitive treatment for the decompensated liver cirrhosis and fulminant liver failure. With limited availability of cadaveric liver allograft, ABO incompatible (ABOi) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) plays an important part in further expansion of donor pool. Over the years, with the introduction of Rituximab and improving desensitisation protocol, outcomes of ABOi LDLT are on par with ABO compatible LT. However, ABOi LDLT protocol varies markedly from centre to centre. Intravenous Rituximab followed by plasmapheresis or immunoadsorption effectively reduce ABO isoagglutinins titre before transplant, thereby reducing the risk of antibody mediated rejection in the post-transplant period. Local infusion therapy and splenectomy are not used routinely at most of the centres in Rituximab era. Post-transplant immunosuppression usually consists of standard triple drug regime, and tacrolimus trough levels are targeted at higher level compared to ABO compatible LT. Introduction of newer therapies like Belatacept and Obinutuzumab hold promise to further improve outcomes and reduce the risk of antibody mediated rejection related complications. ABOi LT in emergency situations like acute liver failure and deceased donor LT is challenging due to limited time period for desensitisation protocol before transplant, and available evidence are still limited but encouraging.

INASL-SAASL Consensus Statements on NAFLD Name Change to MAFLD.

There is an ongoing debate on the change of terminology of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to metabolic associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). Experts from the Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) and the South Asian Association for Study of the Liver (SAASL) involved in diagnosing, managing, and preventing NAFLD met in March 2022 to deliberate if the name change from NAFLD to MAFLD is appropriate, as proposed by a group of experts who published a "consensus" statement in 2020. Proponents of name change to MAFLD opined that NAFLD does not reflect current knowledge, and the term MAFLD was suggested as a more appropriate overarching term. However, this "consensus" group which proposed the name change to MAFLD did not represent the views and opinions of gastroenterologists and hepatologists, as well as perceptions of patients across the globe, given the fact that change of nomenclature for any disease entity is bound to have multidimensional impact on all aspects of patient care. This statement is the culmination of the participants' combined efforts who presented recommendations on specific issues concerning the proposed name change. The recommendations were then circulated to all the core group members and updated based on a systematic literature search. Finally, all the members voted on them using the nominal voting technique as per the standard guidelines. The quality of evidence was adapted from the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

Early allograft dysfunction after living donor liver transplantation-current concepts and future directions.

Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) after liver transplantation is a significant clinical problem that negatively impacts graft and patient outcomes. The rising incidence of EAD and what it means concerning living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an area of great interest. However, EAD after LDLT is a complex research topic yet to be reviewed comprehensively. Most of the literature on EAD is based on experience in deceased donor liver transplantation, and limited information is available in the context of LDLT. Thus, in this review, we present an overview of EAD after LDLT and have attempted to present balanced points of view on all its aspects, such as definitions, pathogenesis, risk factors, predictive markers, and management. The review aims to broadly overview the nature and extent of ongoing research evidence on this complex topic and inform practice in the field by identifying key concepts and knowledge gaps and highlighting areas that require further inquiry.

National Liver Allocation Policy-Consensus Document by the Liver Transplantation Society of India for a Nationally Uniform System of Allocation of Deceased Donor Liver Grafts.

Background: Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is increasing in India and now constitutes nearly one-third of all liver transplantation procedures performed in the country. There is currently no uniform national system of allocation of deceased donor livers. Methods: A national task force consisting of 19 clinicians involved in liver transplantation from across the country was constituted under the aegis of the Liver Transplantation Society of India to develop a consensus document addressing the above issues using a modified Delphi process of consensus development. Results: The National Liver Allocation Policy consensus document includes 46 statements covering all aspects of DDLT, including minimum listing criteria, listing for acute liver failure, DDLT wait-list management, system of prioritisation based on clinical urgency for adults and children, guidelines for allocation of paediatric organs and allocation priorities for liver grafts recovered from public sector hospitals. Conclusion: This document is the first step in the setting up of a nationally consistent policy of deceased donor liver allocation.

Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) Guidance Paper on Nomenclature, Diagnosis and Treatment of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a major cause of chronic liver disease globally and in India. The already high burden of NAFLD in India is expected to further increase in the future in parallel with the ongoing epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Given the high prevalence of NAFLD in the community, it is crucial to identify those at risk of progressive liver disease to streamline referral and guide proper management. Existing guidelines on NAFLD by various international societies fail to capture the entire landscape of NAFLD in India and are often difficult to incorporate in clinical practice due to fundamental differences in sociocultural aspects and health infrastructure available in India. A lot of progress has been made in the field of NAFLD in the 7 years since the initial position paper by the Indian National Association for the Study of Liver on NAFLD in 2015. Further, the ongoing debate on the nomenclature of NAFLD is creating undue confusion among clinical practitioners. The ensuing comprehensive review provides consensus-based, guidance statements on the nomenclature, diagnosis, and treatment of NAFLD that are practically implementable in the Indian setting.

Identifying the early predictors of non-response to steroids in patients with flare of autoimmune hepatitis causing acute-on-chronic liver failure.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Early identification of non-response to steroids is critical in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) causing acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). We assessed if this non-response can be accurately identified within first few days of treatment. METHODS: Patients with AIH-ACLF without baseline infection/hepatic encephalopathy were identified from APASL ACLF research consortium (AARC) database. Diagnosis of AIH-ACLF was based mainly on histology. Those treated with steroids were assessed for non-response (defined as death or liver transplant at 90 days for present study). Laboratory parameters, AARC, and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were assessed at baseline and day 3 to identify early non-response. Utility of dynamic SURFASA score [- 6.80 + 1.92*(D0-INR) + 1.94*(∆%3-INR) + 1.64*(∆%3-bilirubin)] was also evaluated. The performance of early predictors was compared with changes in MELD score at 2 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-five out of one hundred and sixty-five patients (age-38.2 ± 15.0 years, 67.2% females) with AIH-ACLF [median MELD 24 (IQR: 22-27); median AARC score 7 (6-9)] given oral prednisolone 40 (20-40) mg per day were analyzed. The 90 day transplant-free survival in this cohort was 45.7% with worse outcomes in those with incident infections (56% vs 28.0%, p = 0.03). The AUROC of pre-therapy AARC score [0.842 (95% CI 0.754-0.93)], MELD [0.837 (95% CI 0.733-0.94)] score and SURFASA score [0.795 (95% CI 0.678-0.911)] were as accurate as ∆MELD at 2 weeks [0.770 (95% CI 0.687-0.845), p = 0.526] and better than ∆MELD at 3 days [0.541 (95% CI 0.395, 0.687), p < 0.001] to predict non-response. Combination of AARC score > 6, MELD score > 24 with SURFASA score ≥ - 1.2, could identify non-responders at day 3 (concomitant- 75% vs either - 42%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Baseline AARC score, MELD score, and the dynamic SURFASA score on day 3 can accurately identify early non-response to steroids in AIH-ACLF.

Good outcomes of living donor liver transplant in primary sclerosing cholangitis: an experience from North India.

BACKGROUND: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a chronic cholestatic liver disease. In the absence of effective medical therapy, liver transplant is the definitive treatment for advanced stage. However, recurrence of PSC after liver transplant is of concern which can lead to graft failure and may require retransplant. There are limited data on outcomes of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) in PSC. Also, in LDLT as donors are genetically related there can be an increased risk of recurrence. We conducted this retrospective study to analyze the outcomes of LDLT in PSC at a tertiary liver transplant center in north India. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 3213 transplant recipients who underwent LDLT from January 2006 to May 2021. Of these 26 (0.80%) patients had PSC as indication for liver transplantation (PSC = 24, PSC-AIH overlap = 2). Data analysis was done to look for baseline demographics, clinical details, transplant outcomes, PSC recurrence, and survival. RESULTS: Mean age of study group was 42 (± 13.8) years and 19 patients (73.1%) were males. All patients had decompensated cirrhosis at the time of transplant. Mean CTP score and MELD score were 9.5 (± 1.8) and 18.9 (± 7.1), respectively. Sixteen patients received modified right lobe graft, seven extended right lobe graft and five patients received left lateral graft. Median graft weight and mean graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR) were 633.5 (IQR 473.5-633.5) grams and 1.23 (± 0.42), respectively. Most common biliary anastomosis was hepaticojejunostomy, done in 19 (73.1%) while duct to duct anastomosis was performed in 7 (26.9%) patients. Median follow-up was 96 (36-123) months. One patient had ulcerative colitis and none had cholangiocarcinoma. Two (7.7%) patients had bile leak during early post-transplant period. Three (11.1%) patients developed graft rejection and were managed successfully with steroid pulses. Three patients died during early post-transplant period while seven deaths occurred during long-term follow-up including one death due to COVID-19. Five (21.73%) patients had recurrence of PSC of which two patients had graft loss including one after retransplantation. The one year graft and patient survival rate was 88.5%. CONCLUSION: LDLT can be performed in PSC with good long-term outcomes with a risk of PSC recurrence in about one-fifth patients.

Living donor liver transplant outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: does a decrease in case volume impact the overall outcomes?

Background: High-volume centers (HVCs) are classically associated with better outcomes. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there has been a decrease in the regular liver transplantation (LT) activity at our center. This study analyzed the effect of the decline in LT on posttransplant patient outcomes at our HVC. Methods: We compared the surgical outcomes of patients who underwent LT during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown (April 1, 2020 to September 30, 2020) with outcomes in the pre-pandemic calendar year (April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020). Results: During the 6 months of pandemic lockdown, 60 patients underwent LT (43 adults and 17 children) while 228 patients underwent LT (178 adults and 50 children) during the pre-pandemic calendar year. Patients in the pandemic group had significantly higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores (24.39±9.55 vs. 21.14±9.17, P=0.034), Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores (11.46±2.32 vs. 10.25±2.24, P=0.03), and incidence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (30.2% vs. 10.2%, P=0.002). Despite performing LT in sicker patients with COVID-19-related challenges, the 30-day (14% vs. 18.5%, P=0.479), 3-month (16.3% vs. 20.2%, P=0.557), and 6-month mortality rates (23.3% vs. 28.7%, P=0.477) were lower, but not statistically significant when compared to the pre-pandemic cohort. Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown the number of LT procedures performed at our HVC declined by half because prevailing conditions allowed LT in very sick patients only. Despite these changes, outcomes were not inferior during the pandemic period compared to the pre-pandemic calendar year. Greater individualization of patient care contributed to non-inferior outcomes in these sick recipients.