RESUMO
Introduction The impact of donor age on liver transplantation is well known. Data on an appropriate donor age cut-off for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with a background of hepatitis C (HCV) is generally limited. The objective of this study was to determine whether limiting donor age to less than 35 years improved outcomes in patients with HCV-related end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Methods This was a retrospective review of 169 patients who underwent LDLT for HCV-related ESLD. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received grafts from donors ≤ 35 (Group 1) or > 35 (Group 2) years of age. Kaplan Meier curves were used to determine survival. Uni and multivariate analysis were performed to determine independent predictors of mortality. Results Mean donor age was 25.1 ± 5.2 and 40.1 ± 3.4 years (P < 0.0001). Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) was seen in 11.7% patients in Group 1 versus 29.6% in Group 2 (P = 0.02). A significant difference in mortality was present between the two groups, i.e., 33.3% versus 15.8% (P = 0.04). The estimated four-year overall survival (OS) was 78% and 64% (P = 0.03). Upon doing univariate analysis, the donor age (P = 0.04) and EAD (P = 0.006) were found to be significant variables for mortality. On multivariate analysis, EAD was the only independent predictor of mortality (Hazard ratio: 2.6; confidence interval: 1.1 - 5.8; P = 0.01). Conclusion Opting for younger donors (≤ 35 years) for HCV-related ESLD patients lowers the risk of EAD and improves overall survival.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an established treatment for patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within Milan criteria. Acceptable outcomes have been demonstrated in patients fulfilling extended criteria. Here, we share our experience with LDLT for patients with HCC within and beyond Milan criteria, with emphasis on poor prognostic factors. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent LDLT between 2012 and 2017 and had HCC proven on explant liver histopathology. A total of 117 patients were included. Patients who died early after transplant (in <30 days) were excluded. For outcomes, patients were divided into prognostic groups. These groups were based on (1) alpha fetoprotein >600, (2) poor differentiation, and (3) the presence of lymphovascular invasion. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was determined using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Median age was 53 (30-73) years. Median follow-up was 20.3 (1-63.2) months. Median model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score was 19 (9-34). Of a total of 117 patients, 74 (63.2%) patients met Milan criteria. Recurrence rate was 12/117 (10.3%). Actuarial 5-year RFS was 88% and 82% (P = 0.3) in patients within and outside Milan criteria. There was no difference in 3-year RFS in patients with 0, 1, or 2 poor prognostic factors within Milan criteria (92%, 87%, and 75%, respectively; P = 0.3). However, a significant difference in RFS was seen in patients outside Milan criteria (92%, 93%, and 53%; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients within Milan criteria have acceptable RFS even in the presence of poor prognostic factors. However, the presence of two or more poor prognostic variables significantly impacts RFS of patients outside Milan criteria.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The European association for the study of the liver and chronic liver failure consortium (EASL-CLIF) recently proposed diagnostic criteria for acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF). There is lack of data regarding liver transplant outcomes in ACLF patients based on these criteria. The objective of this study was to determine outcome following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in ACLF patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent LDLT for ACLF based on European association for the study of the liver and chronic liver failure consortium (EASL-CLIF) diagnostic criteria (group 1) (N = 60) and compared them with ACLF patients who did not undergo transplantation (group 2) (N = 59). The primary outcome of interest was 30 day mortality. We also looked at one year survival in these patients. Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves and Log rank test was used to determine significance between variables. RESULTS: Median MELD scores for group 1 and 2 patients in ACLF grade 1 was 28 (20-38) and 31 (24-36), in ACLF grade 2 was 35 (24-42) and 36 (24-42) and in ACLF grade 3 was 36 (29-42) and 38 (32-52). For group 1 and 2, 30 day mortality in ACLF grade 1, 2 and 3 was 2/43(4.6%) versus 9/15(60%) (P < 0.001), 1/15 (6.6%) versus 13/19 (68.4%), 0/2 (0%) versus 20/25 (80%) (P < 0.001). Actuarial 1 year overall survival was 92% versus 11% (P < 0.001) in patients who underwent transplantation versus those who did not. One year survival in patients with grade 1 and 2 ACLF who received transplant versus medical treatment was 91% versus 13% and 93% versus 15% (P < 0.001) respectively. CONCLUSION: LDLT has excellent outcomes in patients with EASL-CLIF grade 1 and 2 ACLF. Without transplantation, ACLF patients have a very poor prognosis.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is paucity of data on intermediate-term post liver transplant outcomes from South Asia. The objective of this study was to determine survival outcomes in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in a busy liver transplant center in Pakistan. METHODS: This study was a review of patients who underwent LDLT between 2012 and 2016. A total of 321 patients were included in this study. Early (within 90 days) and late (>90 days) morbidity and mortality was assessed. Estimated 1- and 4-year survival was determined. RESULTS: Median age was 48 (18-73) years. Male to female ratio was 4.5:1. Out of total 346 complications, 184 (57.3%) patients developed 276 (79.7%) complications in early post-transplant period, whereas there were 70 (21.3%) late complications. Most common early complication was pleural effusion in 46 (16.6%) patients. Biliary complications were the most common late complication and were seen in 31/70 (44.2%) patients. Overall 21.4% patients had a biliary complication. The 3-month mortality was 14%. The estimated 1- and 4-year OS for a MELD cutoff of 30 was 84.5 versus 72 and 80 versus 57% (P = 0.01). There was no donor mortality. CONCLUSION: Acceptable intermediate-term post-transplant outcomes were achieved with LDLT. There is a need to improve outcomes in high-MELD patients.
