Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Patients Research Articles

Validation of Japanese indication criteria for deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Analysis of US national registry data.

The Japanese indication criteria for liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been updated based on living donor LT data to include either the Milan criteria (MC) or the 5-5-500 rule, which requires a nodule size of ≤5cm, ≤5 nodules, and an alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level ≤500ng/mL. We aimed to validate the 5-5-500 rule and the MC for deceased donor LT (DDLT). Using national registry data from the United States from 2010 to 2014, we separated DDLT patients into four groups based on the MC and the 5-5-500 rule. The AFP values were stratified into categories: ≤100, 101-300, 301-500, and >500ng/mL. The 5-year survival rate was significantly lower for patients in the groups within MC/beyond 5-5-500 (56.3%) or beyond MC/5-5-500 (60.7%) than for patients in the groups within MC/5-5-500 (76.2%) and beyond MC/within 5-5-500 (72.3%) (p<0.01). Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence at 5years was highest for the within MC/beyond 5-5-500 (25.4%) group, followed by the beyond MC/within 5-5-500 (13.1%), beyond MC/5-5-500 (9.6%), and within MC/5-5-500 (7.4%) groups. The stratified 5-year survival rates after DDLT were 76.5%, 72.4%, 58.4%, and 55.6% in the AFP ≤100, 101-300, 301-500, and >500 categories, respectively (p<0.01). The 5-5-500 rule guides the appropriate selection of patients with HCC for DDLT. Patients with AFP levels from 300 to 500ng/mL had inferior outcomes even when they met the 5-5-500 rule, so further investigation is needed to guide their treatment.

Investigation of Changes in Skeletal Muscle Mass and Muscle Quality and Factors Affecting Changes in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation

In Japan, there are very few cases of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) and even fewer studies on the effects of DDLT on sarcopenia. This study examined the changes in skeletal muscle mass and quality in DDLT, the factors related to these changes, and survival rates. Using computed tomography (CT), we retrospectively measured L3 skeletal muscle index (L3SMI) and intramuscular adipose tissue content (IMAC) at admission, discharge, and 1-year post-DDLT in 23 patients with DDLT from our hospital between 2011 and 2020. We investigated the relationships between changes in L3SMI and IMAC associated with DDLT and between various admission factors and survival. Patients with DDLT showed significant decreases in L3SMI during hospitalization (P < .05). Although L3SMI tended to increase postdischarge, in 11 (73%) cases, it was lower at 1-year post-DDLT than that on admission. Moreover, decreases in L3SMI during hospitalization were correlated to L3SMI on admission (r=0.475, P < 0.05). Intramuscular adipose tissue content increased from admission to discharge and decreased 1-year post-DDLT. Admission L3SMI and IMAC were not significantly correlated with survival. This study suggests that the skeletal muscle mass of DDLT patients decreased during hospitalization and showed a slight tendency to improve after discharge, but the decrease tended to be prolonged. In addition, patients with higher skeletal muscle mass at admission tended to lose more skeletal muscle mass during hospitalization. Deceased donor liver transplantation was identified as a potential contributor to improved muscle quality, whereas skeletal muscle mass and quality on admission did not affect post-DDLT survival.

A model for calculating the long-term estimated post-transplant survival of deceased donor liver transplant patients.

The estimated long-term survival (EPTS) score is used for kidney allocation. A comparable prognostic tool to accurately quantify EPTS benefit in deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) candidates is nonexistent. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database, we developed, calibrated, and validated a nonlinear regression equation to calculate liver-EPTS (L-EPTS) for 5- and 10-year outcomes in adult DDLT recipients. The population was randomly split (70:30) into two discovery (N=26,372 and N=46,329) and validation cohorts (N=11,288 and N=19,859) for 5- and 10-year post-transplant outcomes, respectively. Discovery cohorts were used for variable selection, Cox proportional hazard regression modeling, and nonlinear curve fitting. Eight clinical variables were selected to construct the L-EPTS formula, and a five-tiered ranking system was created. Tier thresholds were defined and the L-EPTS model was calibrated (R2=0.96 [5-year] and 0.99 [10-year]). Patients' median survival probabilities in the discovery cohorts for 5- and 10-year outcomes ranged from 27.94% to 89.22% and 16.27% to 87.97%, respectively. The L-EPTS model was validated via calculation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves using validation cohorts. Area under the ROC curve was 82.4% (5-year) and 86.5% (10-year). L-EPTS has high applicability and clinical utility because it uses easily obtained pre-transplant patients characteristics to accurately discriminate between those who are likely to receive a prolonged survival benefit and those who are not. It is important to evaluate medical urgency alongside survival benefit and placement efficiency when considering the allocation of a scarce resource. There are no funding sources related to this project.

Outcomes of the Initial Phase of an Adult Living vs Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Program in a Low-Volume Transplant Center: Integration of Hepatobiliary and Transplant Surgery

The development of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is clinically challenging, especially in a low-volume transplant program. We evaluated the short-term outcomes of LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) to demonstrate the feasibility of performing LDLT in a low-volume transplant and/or high-volume complex hepatobiliary surgery program during the initial phase. We conducted a retrospective study of LDLT and DDLT in Chiang Mai University Hospital from October 2014 to April 2020. Postoperative complications and 1-year survival were compared between the 2 groups. Forty patients who underwent LT in our hospital were analyzed. There were 20 LDLT patients and 20 DDLT patients. The operative time and hospital stay were significantly longer in the LDLT group than in the DDLT group. The incidence of complications in both groups was comparable, except for biliary complications, which were higher in the LDLT group. Bile leakage, found in 3 patients (15%), is the most common complication in a donor. The 1-year survival rates of both groups were also comparable. Even during the initial phase of the low-volume transplant program, LDLT and DDLT had comparable perioperative outcomes. Surgical expertise in complex hepatobiliary surgery is necessary to facilitate effective LDLT, potentially increasing case volumes and promoting program sustainability.

Long-Term Results of Endoscopic Metal Stenting for Biliary Anastomotic Stricture after Liver Transplantation.

(1) Background: Anastomotic biliary stricture (ABS) is a well-known complication of liver transplantation which can lead to secondary biliary cirrhosis and graft dysfunction. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of endoscopic metal stenting of ABS in the setting of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). (2) Methods: Consecutive DDLT patients with endoscopic metal stenting for ABS between 2010 and 2015 were screened. Data on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (until June 2022) were collected. The primary outcome was endoscopic treatment failure defined as the need for surgical refection. (3) Results: Among the 465 patients who underwent LT, 41 developed ABS. It was diagnosed after a mean period of 7.4 months (+/-10.6) following LT. Endoscopic treatment was technically successful in 95.1% of cases. The mean duration of endoscopic treatment was 12.8 months (+/-9.1) and 53.7% of patients completed a 1-year treatment. After a mean follow-up of 6.9 years (+/-2.3), endoscopic treatment failed in nine patients (22%) who required surgical refection. Conclusions: Endoscopic management with metal stenting of ABS after DDLT was technically successful in most cases, and half of the patients had at least one year of indwelling stent. Endoscopic treatment long-term failure rate occurred in one fifth of the patients.

Lymphopenia at the time of transplant is associated with short-term mortality after deceased donor liver transplantation

Absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) is considered a surrogate marker for nutritional status and immunocompetence. We investigated the association between ALC and post-liver transplant outcomes in patients who received a deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT). Patients were categorized by ALC at liver transplant: low (<500/μL), mid (500-1000/μL), and high ALC (>1000/μL). Our main analysis used retrospective data (2013-2018) for DDLT recipients from Henry Ford Hospital (United States); the results were further validated using data from the Toronto General Hospital (Canada). Among 449 DDLT recipients, the low ALC group demonstrated higher 180-day mortality than mid and high ALC groups (83.1% vs 95.8% and 97.4%, respectively; low vs mid: P = .001; low vs high: P < .001). A larger proportion of patients with low ALC died of sepsis compared with the combined mid/high groups (9.1% vs 0.8%; P < .001). In multivariable analysis, pretransplant ALC was associated with 180-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.20; P = .004). Patients with low ALC had higher rates of bacteremia (22.7% vs 8.1%; P < .001) and cytomegaloviremia (15.2% vs 6.8%; P = .03) than patients with mid/high ALC. Low ALC pretransplant through postoperative day 30 was associated with 180-day mortality among patients who received rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction (P = .001). Pretransplant lymphopenia is associated with short-term mortality and a higher incidence of posttransplant infections in DDLT patients.

Comparison of 5-year Survival of Living vs Deceased Donor Liver Transplant based on MELD Score at Transplantation

Background: Liver transplantation remains the most effective treatment for end stage liver disease and selected primary malignancies. With increasing numbers of patients on the waitlist and growing organ shortage, US transplant centers are increasingly looking toward living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Single center and meta-regression analysis have shown that LDLT have superior patient survival over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to assess whether the survival of recipient of LDLT was superior to DDLT after adjusting for the MELD. Methods: Data was obtained from the SRTR between January 1st 2002 and December 31st 2018. We included 90,046 patients who were ≥18 years who had at least one year of follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had multivisceral or previous Tx or cold ischemia time ≥ 24h. LDLT and DDLT were stratified based on MELD score at transplantation. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and multivariable cox regression were performed. Results: DDLT were 86,654 (96.2%) and LDLT were 3,392 (3.8%) respectively. The mean MELD for patients who underwent DDLT was 21.3 +/- 9.9 vs LDLT 14.9 +/- 5.5 (p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that LDLT patients had overall improved survival compared to DDLT (p<0.001). However, following stratification by MELD score, there was no survival benefit at a MELD>23. Multivariable cox-regression showed that DDLT patients with a MELD score >26 had significant improved survival compared to LDLT (Figure 1). Conclusion: Following adjustment, patients with higher MELD scores (>26) had a higher 5-year survival compared to patients undergoing LDLT.

A Model for Calculating the Long-Term Estimated Post-Transplant Survival of Deceased Donor Liver Transplant Patients

A Model for Calculating the Long-Term Estimated Post-Transplant Survival of Deceased Donor Liver Transplant Patients

Endoscopic and Percutaneous Biliary Interventions after Liver Transplantation: Nationwide Data in Korea.

Background/AimsBiliary complications including biliary strictures and bile leaks are the most common complications that occur after liver transplantation (LT). Endoscopic treatment with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) is considered the first-line treatment, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) can serve as an alternative or rescue therapy. However, nationwide clinical data on the frequency of ERC and PTC following LT have not yet been investigated.MethodsUsing the nationwide claims database, we investigated patients who underwent LT between 2012 and 2014 in Korea and followed them until 2015. We analyzed the prevalence and characteristics of patients and biliary procedures, including ERC and PTC implemented after LT.ResultsA total of 3,481 patients underwent LT during the 3-year study period. Among them, 3.0% of patients underwent biliary intervention postoperatively during the same hospitalization period, and 21.4% of patients received biliary intervention later on after initially being discharged from the hospital following LT. A total of 16.9% and 12.1% of patients underwent ERC and PTC after LT, respectively. The median period from LT to the first biliary intervention was 7.8 months (interquartile range, 3.5 to 14.6 months), and these patients underwent an average of 3.2±2.8 biliary procedures during the follow-up period. Patients undergoing living donor LT were more than twice as likely to undergo biliary procedures as those undergoing deceased donor LT (25.5% vs 12.1%).ConclusionsApproximately one-fourth of patients in Korea who underwent LT subsequently underwent ERC or PTC. Compared with deceased donor LT patients, those undergoing living donor LT underwent more biliary interventions and were more difficult to treat.

Expanded Efficacy of Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support for Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation

Perioperative respiratory failure occurs frequently in liver transplantation (LT) recipients. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) has been applied in patients with acute and potentially reversible life-threatening respiratory failure that is unresponsive to conventional therapies. VV-ECMO is used as a bridging device for lung transplantation. However, there are few reports on VV-ECMO as bridging therapy in LT patients with respiratory failure. This study assessed patient outcomes of VV-ECMO after LT and investigated its applicability and safety in LT surgery. From January 2017 to May 2019, VV-ECMO was applied in 8 deceased donor LT patients at Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital. Patients administered pre- or postoperative VV-ECMO showed a 50% 1-year survival rate and 75% success rate for ECMO weaning. Six patients were administered preoperative VV-ECMO for respiratory failure, of whom 4 patients survived for longer than a year. Two patients who received VV-ECMO for refractory hypoxia during LT died; 1 failed ECMO weaning, and the other was successfully weaned off ECMO but died of other causes. VV-ECMO could lower the risk of hypoxemia-related organ failure while awaiting and during LT via better controlled gas exchange without significant acute morbidity. VV-ECMO may expand operability in patients with severe respiratory failure awaiting LT.

Meta-analysis and meta-regression of outcomes for adult living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation.

Prior single center or registry studies have shown that living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) decreases waitlist mortality and offers superior patient survival over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for adult LDLT and DDLT via systematic review. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine patient survival and graft survival, MELD, waiting time, technical complications, and postoperative infections. Out of 8600 abstracts, 19 international studies comparing adult LDLT and DDLT published between 1/2005 and 12/2017 were included. U.S. outcomes were analyzed using registry data. Overall, 4571 LDLT and 66,826 DDLT patients were examined. LDLT was associated with lower mortality at 1, 3, and 5years posttransplant (5-year HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.81-0.93], p<.0001), similar graft survival, lower MELD at transplant (p<.04), shorter waiting time (p<.0001), and lower risk of rejection (p=.02), with a higher risk of biliary complications (OR 2.14, p<.0001). No differences were observed in rates of hepatic artery thrombosis. In meta-regression analysis, MELD difference was significantly associated with posttransplant survival (R2 0.56, p=.02). In conclusion, LDLT is associated with improved patient survival, less waiting time, and lower MELD at LT, despite posing a higher risk of biliary complications that did not affect survival posttransplant.

Poor preoperative enteral nutrition would be a risk factor for readmission due to infection after liver transplantation.

BackgroundMost patients who undergo liver transplantation (LT) have advanced cirrhosis and poor nutritional status. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of enteral nutrition (EN) on the clinical outcomes after LT.MethodsFrom 2015 to 2019, the medical records of recipient of LT at Kosin University Gospel Hospital were retrospectively reviewed.ResultsThirty-seven patients underwent LT. Nineteen patients underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and 18 patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). One LDLT patient was excluded because transplantation was done within 1 month. Five DDLT patients were excluded either because they died within 1 month (n=4) or received transplantation within 1 month. (n=1). Therefore, 31 patients were analyzed. Psoas-muscle index (P=0.715) and serum albumin (P=0.111) were not statistically different between the LDLT and DDLT groups. Four patients (4/31) were readmitted because of infection. One LDLT patient was diagnosed with genitourinary infection. The three DDLT patients were diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis (n=1), diverticulitis (n=1), and sepsis (n=1). Readmission caused by infection was not statistically different between LDLD and DDLT patients (P=0.284). Preoperative EN <25% of the recommended amount (P=0.016) was significantly associated with readmission related to infection. In multivariate analyses, preoperative EN <25% was an independent risk factor for readmission due to infection after LT regardless of psoas-muscle index, baseline Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, or LT type. ConclusionsPreoperative poor EN is significantly associated with readmission risk due to infection within 3 months of LT.

Endoscopic treatment of biliary complications after duct-to-duct biliary anastomosis in pediatric liver transplantation.

Studies reporting outcomes of endoscopic treatment methods in children who underwent liver transplantation (LT) is very limited. We present our outcomes, as a high-volume transplant center where endoscopic methods are preferred as the first choice in the treatment of biliary complications in children. Patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as the first treatment approach for biliary complications after LT between 2005 and 2017 were included. Clinical data included patient demographics, ERCP indications (stricture or leak), and treatment outcomes, including the need for percutaneous and surgical intervention. ERCP was performed in 49 patients who had a duct-to-duct anastomosis (38 living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), 11 deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT)). The most common biliary complication was stricture. Our endoscopic success rate was 66.7% (18/27) and 75% (6/8) in LDLT and DDLT patients with stricture (p > 0.05), respectively. While our endoscopic success rate was 75% (3/4) in patients with leak alone after LDLT, it was 25% (1/4) in patients with leak and stricture in this group. The endoscopic success rate was 50% in two patients who had leak alone after DDLT. ERCP should be considered as a preferential treatment option for the management of biliary complications in pediatric liver transplant patients with duct-to-duct anastomosis, as in adults.

Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in living and deceased donor liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Although a number of technical problems and donor safety issues associated with living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have been resolved, some initial clinical studies showed an increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence in LDLT. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess differences in tumor recurrence between LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). After systematic retrievals of studies about LDLT and DDLT for HCC, articles were selected with a rationale of emphasizing inter-group comparability. Results from multivariate analyses were combined and discussed together with univariate analyses. In subgroup analysis, the impact of organ allocation policy was taken into consideration. Seven articles were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, a salient result that emerged from the seven studies was a significant increased risk of HCC recurrence in the LDLT group than in the DDLT group (P = 0.01). The most significant increase in hazard ratio was found in studies where organs tended to be allocated to non-tumor patients. An increased risk for HCC recurrence in LDLT as compared with DDLT patients was found. The relatively shorter preoperative observation windows in LDLT may lead to fewer cases of HCC with invasive features being screened out, which may provide a possible explanation for the high rates of HCC recurrence.

Current diagnosis and treatment of benign biliary strictures after living donor liver transplantation.

Despite advances in surgical techniques, benign biliary strictures after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remain a significant biliary complication and play an important role in graft and patient survival. Benign biliary strictures after transplantation are classified into anastomotic or non-anastomotic strictures. These two types differ in presentation, outcome, and response to therapy. The leading causes of biliary strictures include impaired blood supply, technical errors during surgery, and biliary anomalies. Because patients usually have non-specific symptoms, a high index of suspicion should be maintained. Magnetic resonance cholangiography has gained widespread acceptance as a reliable noninvasive tool for detecting biliary complications. Endoscopy has played an increasingly prominent role in the diagnosis and treatment of biliary strictures after LDLT. Endoscopic management in LDLT recipients may be more challenging than in deceased donor liver transplantation patients because of the complex nature of the duct-to-duct reconstruction. Repeated aggressive endoscopic treatment with dilation and the placement of multiple plastic stents is considered the first-line treatment for biliary strictures. Percutaneous and surgical treatments are now reserved for patients for whom endoscopic management fails and for those with multiple, inaccessible intrahepatic strictures or Roux-en-Y anastomoses. Recent advances in enteroscopy enable treatment, even in these latter cases. Direct cholangioscopy, another advanced form of endoscopy, allows direct visualization of the inner wall of the biliary tree and is expected to facilitate stenting or stone extraction. Rendezvous techniques can be a good option when the endoscopic approach to the biliary stricture is unfeasible. These developments have resulted in almost all patients being managed by the endoscopic approach.

The evaluation of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in cardiac deceased donor liver transplant patients in China

Objective: The management of liver receivers requires intense immunosuppression to prevent graft rejection. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a common immunosuppressant but frequently suffer dose reduction for gastrointestinal adverse reactions (GI). Hence, the enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) is introduced as a substitute for MMF to reduce GI. The study was designed to investigate the efficacy, safety and exposure equation of EC-MPS in liver transplant patients in China.Methods: Ninety-two liver receivers who administered EC-MPS or MMF as a primary immunosuppressant were enrolled in this single-center study and divided into MMF group and EC-MPC group, respectively. Efficacy and safety of EC-MPS were compared with MMF. The MPA exposure was measured at time 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 h after mean 4.5 days of EC-MPS treatment. An equation of limited time points for estimating serum MPA exposure of EC-MPS was established using multiple stepwise regression model.Results: Data show an interpatient variation in MPA AUC, Cmax and Tmax. After a first dose of EC-MPS, the mean value of serum AUC0-12 h was 20.68 mg/L (SD 8.94, range 8.1–46.3). Cmax was 9.7 mg/L (SD 6.48, range 2.7–16.3); Tmax was 1.90 h (SD 0.97, range 0.5–4). The best equation for estimating the AUC was 6.0 1 4 + 0.946C2 + 0.606C3 + 1.154C4 + 2.479C6 + 5.07C12. Comparing with MMF, EC-MPS not only effectively maintained immunosuppression, but also had similar incidences of infection, renal dysfunction and hematological disorders. However, EC-MPS markedly improved GI, the incidence of GI was half of the MMF group.Conclusion: This analysis presented that EC-MPS is an effective and safe immunosuppressant as similar as MMF. The conversion of MMF to EC-MPS could be administered.

Should We Exclude Live Donor Liver Transplantation for Liver Transplant Recipients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation and Intensive Care Unit Care?

BackgroundPatients with acute and chronic liver disease often require admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and mechanical ventilation support before liver transplantation (LT). Rapid disease progression and high mortality on LT waiting lists makes live donor LT (LDLT) an attractive option for this patient population.MethodsDuring 2000 to 2011, all ICU-bound and mechanically ventilated patients receiving an LDLT (n = 7) were compared to patients receiving a deceased donor LT (DDLT) (n = 38).ResultsBoth groups were comparable regarding length of pretransplant ICU stay (DDLT: 2 [1-31] days vs LDLT: 2 [1-8] days; P = 0.2), days under mechanical ventilation (DDLT: 2 [1-31] days vs LDLT: 2 [1-5] days; P = 0.2), pretransplant dialysis (DDLT: 45% vs LDLT: 43%; P = 1) and model for end-stage liver disease score (DDLT: 33 ± 8 vs LDLT: 33 ± 10; P = 0.911). Live donors median evaluation time was 24 hours (18-561 hours). As expected, median time on waiting list was significantly lower in the LDLT group (DDLT: 13 [0-1704] days vs LDLT: 10 [1-33] days; P = 0.008). Incidence of postoperative complications was numerically, albeit not significantly higher in the DDLT versus LDLT (68% vs 29%; P = 0.08). No difference was detected between LDLT and DDLT patients regarding 1-year (DDLT: 76% vs LDLT: 85%), 3-year (DDLT: 68% vs LDLT: 85%), and 5-year (DDLT: 68% vs LDLT: 85%) graft and patient survivals (P = 0.41). No severe donor complication occurred after live donation.ConclusionsThe LDLT may provide a faster access to transplantation and therefore, offers an alternative treatment option for critically ill patients requiring ICU care and mechanical ventilation support at the time of transplantation.

Living Donor Liver Transplant Versus Cadaveric Liver Transplant Survival in Relation to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score

BackgroundThe Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is universally used to prioritize patients on the liver transplant waiting list. It is potentially used to predict survival as well. There has been conflicting evidence on the use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients with high MELD scores. We reported retrospective data comparing survival between LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) In relation to MELD score in a single-center experience. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed our records from 2001 to 2013 for LDLT and DDLT. Data reviewed include the numbers of patients for LDLT and DDLT, age, sex, MELD score, etiology of liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, re-transplantation, median follow-up, mortality (with 1 month, 1 year, or after 1 year), and cause of death. Only adults are included in this analysis. Patients were categorized into MELD scores above and below 25. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for survival, and the log-rank χ2 test was used for comparison, with a value of P < .05 used for significance. ResultsThe total number of transplanted patients at King Faisal Specialist Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was 491. There were 222 patients for LDLT and 269 patients for DDLT. The median age was 53 years (15–80 years), and 292 were male (59.5%). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival rates of LDLT and DDLT were 89%, 85%, and 84%, respectively, for MELD score below 25, and 80%,78%, and 77%, respectively, for MELD score greater than or equal to 25. ConclusionsOur data showed no difference between the survival rates of the two groups (DDLT versus LDLDT), nor that high MELD score has a negative impact on survival. A larger cohort of patients may be needed to confirm these findings.

Living vs. Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Provides Comparable Recovery of Renal Function in Patients With Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Matched Case–Control Study

Outcomes of living versus deceased donor liver transplantation in patients with chronic liver disease and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) was compared using a matched pair study design. Thirty patients with HRS receiving a live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and 90 HRS patients receiving a full graft deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) were compared. LDLT versus DDLT of patients with HRS was associated with decreased peak aspartate aminotransferase levels (339 ± 214 vs. 935 ± 1253 U/L; p = 0.0001), and similar 7-day bilirubin (8.42 ± 7.89 vs. 6.95 ± 7.13 mg/dL; p = 0.35), and international normalized ratio levels (1.93 ± 0.62 vs. 1.78 ± 0.78; p = 0.314). LDLT vs. DDLT had a decreased intensive care unit (2 [1-39] vs. 4 [0-93] days; p = 0.004), and hospital stay (17 [4-313] vs. 26 [0-126] days; p = 0.016) and a similar incidence of overall postoperative complications (20% vs. 27%; p = 0.62). No difference was detected between LDLT and DDLT patients regarding graft survival at 1 (80% vs. 82%), at 3 (69% vs. 76%) and 5 years (65% vs. 76%) (p = 0.63), as well as patient survival at 1 (83% vs. 82%), 3 (72% vs. 77%) and 5 years (72% vs. 77%) (p = 0.93). The incidence of chronic kidney disease post-LT (10% vs. 6%; p = 0.4) was similar between both groups. LDLT results in identical long-term outcome when compared with DDLT in patients with HRS.

Comparison of the outcomes of patients who underwent deceased-donor or living-donor liver transplantation after successful downstaging therapy

Many controversies exist on the different outcomes of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recipients. We aimed to determine the difference in outcomes between HCC patients who underwent LDLT or DDLT after successful downstaging therapy. Eighty-three adult patients were diagnosed with advanced HCC and received a liver transplantation after various successful downstaging therapies: 31 patients underwent LDLT and 52 patients underwent DDLT. We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data of these two groups. The LDLT and DDLT groups showed similar overall complication rates and mortality rates. The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year recurrence-free rates were 77.4, 71, and 62.7% after LDLT and 80.7, 69.2, and 60.5% after DDLT (P=0.771). The overall patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 90.3, 74.2, and 71% after LDLT and 90.4, 71.2, and 67.3% after DDLT (P=0.860). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplant hepatitis B virus recurrence rates were 4, 5, and 10.5%, respectively, for the patients who underwent LDLT and 2.6, 6.7, and 10.7%, respectively, for the patients who underwent DDLT (P=0.918). These data strongly suggest that no significant differences in postoperative complications, tumor recurrence rate, survival rate, and hepatitis B virus recurrence exist between DDLT and LDLT patients.