Liver Graft Survival Research Articles

1147 Long Term Outcomes Following Combined Liver-Kidney Transplantation

Abstract Aim Combined liver kidney transplant (CLKTx) is the mainstay of treatment for concurrent liver failure and end stage renal failure. The use of CLKTx has increased markedly since the introduction of the MELD (Model for End Stage Liver Disease) score for liver allocation. In this study we examined the long-terms outcomes of 25 years of CLKTx in our centre. Method From a database of all transplants from 1997 – 2022, 158 recipients of CLKTx were identified. Primary outcomes of interest were mortality and graft failure. Data was analysed in R studio and GraphPad prism. Results Overall patient survival was 89% at 1 year, 87% at 2 years, 81% at 5 years, 72% at 10 years and 50% at 20 years. The 20-year patient survival with a pre-transplant (preTx) MELD of <20 was 52%, with a preTx MELD of >20 associated with significantly lower 20-year patient survival of 26% (P<0.05). Death censored (dc) liver graft survival was 99% at 1 year, 98% at 2 years, 97% at 5 years and ten years, and 88% at 25 years. A donor age of <40 showed 20-year liver graft survival (dc) of (100%), which was significantly greater than the donor age >40 group (72%, P<0.05). Death censored kidney graft survival was 96% at 1 year, 95% at 2 and 5 years, 92% at ten years and 84% at twenty years post Tx. Conclusions We report favourable long-term outcomes following 25 years of CLKTx. Predictors for better long-term patient and graft survival include pre transplant MELD score and donor age.

A narrative review: predicting liver transplant graft survival using artificial intelligence modeling.

Liver transplantation is the only treatment for patients with liver failure. As demand for liver transplantation grows, it remains a challenge to predict the short- and long-term survival of the liver graft. Recently, artificial intelligence models have been used to evaluate the short- and long-term survival of the liver transplant. To make the models more accurate, suitable liver transplantation characteristics must be used as input to train them. In this narrative review, we reviewed studies concerning liver transplantations published in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases between 2017 and 2022. We picked out 17 studies using our selection criteria and analyzed them, evaluating which medical characteristics were used as input for creation of artificial intelligence models. In eight studies, models estimating only short-term liver graft survival were created, while in five of the studies, models for the prediction of only long-term liver graft survival were built. In four of the studies, artificial intelligence algorithms evaluating both the short- and long-term liver graft survival were created. Medical characteristics that were used as input in reviewed studies and had the biggest impact on the accuracy of the model were the recipient's age, recipient's body mass index, creatinine levels in the recipient's serum, recipient's international normalized ratio, diabetes mellitus, and recipient's model of end-stage liver disease score. To conclude, in order to define important liver transplantation characteristics that could be used as an input for artificial intelligence algorithms when predicting liver graft survival, more models need to be created and analyzed, in order to fully support the results of this review.

Donor heart dysfunction and graft survival in liver and kidney transplants-A register-based study from Sweden.

Stress cardiomyopathy in donors can potentially affect graft function and longevity. This study aims to investigate the association between echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)<50%, and/or the presence of left ventricular regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMA) in organ donors, and short- and long-term liver and kidney graft survival. Our secondary aim was to link graft survival with donor and recipient characteristics. All donors considered for liver and kidney donation with echocardiographic records at Sahlgrenska University Hospital between 2006 and 2016 were matched with their recipients through the Scandiatransplant register. The studied outcomes were graft survival, re-transplantation, and recipient death. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to plot time to event. Multivariate Cox-regression was used to test independence. There were 370 liver donors and 312 kidney donors (matched with 458 recipients) with echocardiographic records at Sahlgrenska University Hospital between June 2006 and November 2016. Of patients with LV dysfunction by echocardiography, there were 102 liver- and 72 kidney donors. Univariate survival analyses showed no statistical difference in the short- and long-term graft survival from donors with LV dysfunction compared to donors without. Donor age>65 years, recipient re-transplantation and recipient liver tumor were predictors of worse outcome in liver transplants (p<.05). Donor age>65, donor hypertension, recipient re-transplantation, and a recipient diagnosis of diabetes or nephritis/glomerulonephritis had a negative association with graft survival in kidney transplants (p<.05). We found no significant association between donor LV dysfunction and short- and long-term graft survival in liver and kidney transplants, suggesting that livers and kidneys from such donors can be safely transplanted.

Kidney after liver transplantation does not have an increased risk of rejection compared to liver alone.

Simultaneous liver kidney (SLK) transplant protects against acute cellular rejection. In 2017, UNOS implemented a "safety net" policy to allow patients with renal recovery to avoid renal transplantation. Whether kidney after liver transplantation (KALT) increases the risk of rejection is unknown. We performed a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database of adult patients who received liver transplant, SLK or KALT between 2010 and 2020. We examined rejection of the liver within 6 months and 1 year of the liver transplant, as well as rejection of the kidney within 6 months and 1 year of receiving the kidney, as well as patient and graft loss. Sixty-six thousand seventy-nine patients were transplanted; 60 168 with liver transplant alone, 5627 with SLK, and 284 with KALT. Acute or chronic liver rejection rates within 6 or 12 months were statistically higher in the KALT group (10.0% and 10.9%) compared to the SLK group (6.1% and 7.5%), but comparable to the LTA group (9.3% and 11.1%). Kidney rejection and graft survival rates were not different. Liver graft survival was worse in KALT than SLK or LTA (Kaplan-Meier estimates.61vs..89 and.90), but these patients were more ill at the time of transplantation. KDPI and LDRI scores were notably lower in the SLK than KALT group. Patient survival was not clinically different between the groups. KALT does not increase the risk of acute or chronic kidney rejection. SLK has a lower risk of early liver rejection, but this effect diminishes by one year to being not clinically different compared to KALT. Given that KALT is immunologically safe, and potentially avoids unnecessary renal graft use, it should be preferred over SLK. Patients undergoing sequential kidney after liver transplant do not have an increased risk of liver or kidney rejection when compared to liver transplant alone or simultaneous liver and kidney transplant.

Long-term outcome of combined radiologic and surgical strategy for the management of biliary complications after pediatric liver transplantation

ObjectivesWe aimed to analyze the risk factors for management failure of BC after pediatric liver transplantation (pLT) by retrospectively analyzing primary pLT performed between 1997 and 2018 (n = 620 patients).ResultsIn all, 117/620 patients (19%) developed BC. The median (range) follow-up was 9 (1.4–21) years. Patient survival at 1, 5 and 10 years was 88.9%, 85.7%, 84.4% and liver graft survival was 82.4%, 77.4%, and 74.3% respectively. Graft not patient survival was impaired by BC (p = 0.01). Multivariate analysis identified the number of dilatation courses > 2 (p = 0.008), prolonged cold ischemia time (p = 0.004), anastomosed multiple biliary ducts (p = 0.019) and hepatic artery thrombosis (p = 0.01) as factors associated with impaired graft survival. The number of dilatation courses > 2 (p < 0.001) and intrahepatic vs anastomotic stricture (p = 0.014) were associated with management failure. Thus, repeated (> 2) radiologic dilatation courses are associated with impaired graft survival and management failure. Overall, graft but not patient survival was impaired by BC.

O203: HLA Matching Between Donors and Recipients Improves Clinical Liver Transplant Graft Survival

Abstract Background and Aims The importance of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching between liver transplant donors and recipients on graft survival remains unclear and is not a clinical consideration in liver transplantation. This study aimed to determine the relationship between HLA matching and liver graft survival using a large-scale multi-center database (UNOS/OPTN) and multivariate logistic analysis. The secondary aim was to determine whether this relationship was influenced by transplant indication and donor status. Methods This retrospective observational analysis was performed using 22,702 liver transplant recipients from the UNOS/OPTN database. Patients were divided into two groups based on number of HLA mismatches (0-3 mismatches vs 4-6 mismatches), and then subcategorized by indication and donor status. Risk-adjusted outcomes were assessed by multivariate Cox analysis adjusting for donor and recipient characteristics and visualized using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results Allograft survival and risk of acute rejection were associated with degree of HLA mismatch. This association between HLA mismatch and graft survival persisted in individuals who underwent transplant for hepatitis, metabolic, drug toxicity and congenital indications. Donor status influenced the relationship between HLA mismatch and graft survival. Graft survival in DBD recipients was longer than in DCD in the 4-6 HLA mismatch group, whereas no significant difference was found in the 0-3 HLA mismatch group. Conclusion HLA mismatch significantly reduced graft survival and increased risk of acute rejection. This association was noted only in specific indications. These findings are of potential clinical relevance to organ allocation, allograft matching algorithms, immunosuppression protocols and transplant surveillance.

Effect of donor resuscitation on early liver graft survival in donation after brain death

Effect of donor resuscitation on early liver graft survival in donation after brain death

Improved outcomes of kidney after liver transplantation after the implementation of the safety net policy.

The number of kidney after liver transplants (KALT) increased after the implementation of the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) safety net policy, but the effects of the policy on KALT outcomes remain unknown. Using the UNOS database, we identified KALT between 60 and 365 days from liver transplant from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020. The main outcome was 1- and 3-year patient, liver, and kidney graft survival. Secondary outcomes included 6-month and 1-year acute rejection (AR) of liver and kidney, and 1-year kidney allograft function. Of the 256 KALT, 90 were pre-policy and 166 post-policy. Compared to pre-policy, post-policy 1- and 3-year liver graft survival was higher (54% and 54% vs. 86% and 81%, respectively, p <0.001), while 1- and 3-year kidney graft survival (99% and 75% vs. 92% and 79%, respectively, p =0.19), and 1- and 3-year patient survival (99% and 99% vs. 95% and 89%, respectively, p =0.11) were not significantly different. Subgroup analysis revealed similar trends in patients with and without renal failure at liver transplant. Liver AR at 6 months was lower post-policy (6.3% vs. 18.3%, p =0.006) but was similar (10.5% vs. 13%, p =0.63) at 1 year. Kidney AR was unchanged post-policy at 6 months and 1 year. Creatinine at 1 year did not differ post-policy versus pre-policy (1.4 vs. 1.3mg/dL, p =0.07) despite a higher proportion of deceased donors, higher Kidney Donor Profile Index, and longer kidney cold ischemia time post-policy ( p <0.05 for all). This 3-year follow-up after the 2017 UNOS policy revision demonstrated that the safety net implementation has resulted in improved liver outcomes for patients who underwent KALT with no increased AR of the liver or the kidney allografts.

The Effect of New Acuity Circle Policy on Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Transplantation in the United States

New deceased donor liver allocation policy using an acuity circle (AC)-based model was implemented on February 4th, 2020. The effect of AC policy on simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of AC policy on SLKT waitlist mortality, transplant probability, and post-transplant outcomes. Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, 4908 adult SLKT candidates during two study periods, pre-AC (Aug-2017 to Feb-2020, N=2770) and post-AC (Feb-2020 to Dec-2021, N=2138) were analyzed. Outcomes included 90-day waitlist mortality, transplant probability, and post-transplant patient and graft survival. Compared to pre-AC period, SLKT recipients during post-AC period had higher median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (24 vs 23, P<0.001), and less percentage of MELD exception (4.6% vs 7.7%, P=0.001). The 90-day waitlist mortality was same, but the probability of SLKT increased in post-AC period (P<0.001). Post-AC period also saw increased utilization of donation after cardiac death organs (11% vs 6.4%, P<0.001) and decreased rates of transplantation among Black candidates (7.9% vs 13%). After risk adjustment, post-AC period was not associated with any significant difference in 90-day waitlist mortality (sub-distribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.80; 95% CI 0.56-1.16, P=0.24), and a higher 90-day probability of SLKT (sHR 1.68; 95% CI 1.41-1.99, P<0.001). During post-transplant period, one-year patient survival, liver and kidney graft survival were comparable between two study periods. The AC liver allocation policy was associated with increased transplant probability of adult SLKT candidates without decreasing waitlist mortality, post-transplant patient survival, or liver and kidney graft survival.

The effects of acuity circle policy on racial disparity in liver transplantation

BackgroundA new deceased donor liver allocation policy using an acuity circle–based model was implemented with the goal of providing equitable access to liver transplantation. We assessed the effect of the acuity circle policy on racial disparities in liver transplantation by analyzing waitlist mortality, transplant probability, and post-transplant outcomes. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 23,717 adult liver transplantation candidates listed during the pre-acuity circle period and 21,051 during the post–acuity circle period (N = 44,768) in the United Network for Organ Sharing database from February 2020 to December 2021. ResultsAcuity circle–policy implementation was not associated with any significant difference in 90-day waitlist mortality but increased the 90-day probability of all candidates. Implementation did not decrease 90-day waitlist mortality but increased the 90-day transplant probability for all patients. One-year patient and liver graft survival were comparable between the study periods for all recipients, but Black recipients had higher rates of 1-year post–liver transplantation mortality and liver graft failure in both periods. ConclusionAlthough the implementation of the acuity circle policy is associated with an increase in transplant probability in White, Black, and Hispanic liver transplantation candidates, it did not change their waitlist mortality, nor did it lead to any improvement in the preexistent worse post-transplant outcomes in Black liver transplantation recipients.

The short and long-term prognostic influences of liver grafts with high bilirubin levels at the time of organ recovery.

Donors with hyperbilirubinemia are often not utilized for liver transplantation (LT) due to concerns about potential liver dysfunction and graft survival. The potential to mitigate organ shortages using such donors remains unclear. This study analyzed adult deceased donor data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2002-2022). Hyperbilirubinemia was categorized as high total bilirubin (3.0-5.0mg/dL) and very high bilirubin (≥5.0mg/dL) in brain-dead donors. We assessed the impact of donor hyperbilirubinemia on 3-month and 3-year graft survival, comparing these outcomes to donors after circulatory death (DCD). Of 138622 donors, 3452 (2.5%) had high bilirubin and 1999 (1.4%) had very high bilirubin levels. Utilization rates for normal, high, and very high bilirubin groups were 73.5%, 56.4%, and 29.2%, respectively. No significant differences were found in 3-month and 3-year graft survival between groups. Donors with high bilirubin had superior 3-year graft survival compared to DCD (hazard ratio .83, p=.02). Factors associated with inferior short-term graft survival included recipient medical condition in intensive care unit (ICU) and longer cold ischemic time; factors associated with inferior long-term graft survival included older donor age, recipient medical condition in ICU, older recipient age, and longer cold ischemic time. Donors with ≥10% macrosteatosis in the very high bilirubin group were also associated with worse 3-year graft survival (p=.04). The study suggests that despite many grafts with hyperbilirubinemia being non-utilized, acceptable post-LT outcomes can be achieved using donors with hyperbilirubinemia. Careful selection may increase utilization and expand the donor pool without negatively affecting graft outcome.

From large-for-size to large-for-flow: A paradigm shift in liver transplantation.

Liver graft-recipient matching remains challenging, and both morphologic and hemodynamic characteristics have been shown to be relevant indicators of post-transplant outcomes. However, no combined analysis is available to date. To study the impact of both morphologic and hemodynamic characteristics of liver grafts on transplantation outcomes, we retrospectively evaluated all consecutive 257 liver transplantations with prospective hemodynamic measurements from 2017 to 2020 in a single-center perspective. First, a morphologic analysis compared recipients with or without large-for-size (LFS), defined by a graft/recipient weight ratio >2.5% and excluding extreme LFS. Second, a hemodynamic analysis compared recipients with or without low portal flow (LPF; <80mL/min per 100 g of liver tissue). Third, an outcome analysis combining LPF and LFS was performed, focusing on liver graft-related morbidity (LGRM), graft and patient survival. LGRM was a composite endpoint, including primary nonfunction, high-risk L-Graft7 category, and portal vein thrombosis. Morphologic analysis showed that LFS (n=33; 12.9%) was not associated with an increased LGRM (12.1% vs 9.4%; p =0.61) or impaired graft and patient survival. However, the hemodynamic analysis showed that LPF (n=43; 16.8%) was associated with a higher LGRM (20.9% vs 7.5%, p = 0.007) and a significantly impaired 90-day graft and patient survival. Multivariable analysis identified LPF but not LFS as an independent risk factor for LGRM (OR: 2.8%; CI:1.088-7.413; and p = 0.03), 90-day (HR: 4%; CI: 1.411-11.551; and p = 0 .01), and 1-year patient survival. LPF is a significant predictor of post-liver transplantation morbi-mortality, independent of LFS when defined as a morphologic metric alone. Consequently, we propose the novel concept of large-for-flow, which may guide graft selection and improve perioperative management of LPF.

Graft Survival in Liver Transplantation: An Artificial Neuronal Network Assisted Analysis of the Importance of Comorbidities.

Liver transplant represents a widespread therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver failure. Up to now, most of the scores describing the probability of liver graft survival have shown poor predictive performance. With this in mind, the present study seeks to analyze the predictive value of recipient comorbidities on liver graft survival within the first year. The study included prospectively collected data from patients who received a liver transplant at our center from 2010 to 2021. A predictive model was then developed through an Artificial Neural Network that included the parameters associated with graft loss as identified by the Spanish Liver Transplant Registry report and comorbidities with prevalence >2% present in our study cohort. Most patients in our study were men (75.5%); mean age was 54.8 ± 9.6 years. The main cause of transplant was cirrhosis (86.7%), and 67.4% of patients had some associated comorbidities. Graft loss due to retransplant or death with dysfunction occurred in 14% of cases. Of all the variables analyzed, we found 3 comorbidities associated with graft loss (as shown by informative value and normalized informative value, respectively): antiplatelet and/or anticoagulants treatments (0.124 and 78.4%), previous immunosuppression (0.110 and 69.6%), and portal thrombosis (0.105 and 66.3%). Remarkably, our model showed a C statistic of 0.745 (95% CI, 0.692-0.798; asymptotic P < .001), which was higher than others found in previous studies. Our model identified key parameters that may influence graft loss, including specific recipient comorbidities. The use of artificial intelligence methods could reveal connections that may be overlooked by conventional statistics.

Ascending aorta cannulation for isolated liver procurement in extended criteria donors: a safe option in case of massive infrarenal aortic atherosclerosis.

The chronic organ shortage and the increased number of patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation have led to a progressive increase in the use of extended criteria donors. Nowadays more and more overweight donors with several comorbidities are selected for donation providing acceptable patient and liver graft survival. These donors have often aortic atherosclerosis which can spare the hepatic artery making suitable the liver for procurement. Massive aortic atherosclerosis localized to infrarenal aorta can challenge aortic cannulation for organ cooling. We herein describe in a stepwise approach the aortic cannulation realized at the ascending aorta level in case of massive infrarenal aortic atherosclerosis in ECD donors. This technique represents a safe option when abdominal aorta is not suitable for cannulation and it should be included into the surgical armamentarium of liver transplant surgeon.

Low socio-economic status is associated with increased graft failure in liver transplantation

Background: Low socio-economic status (SES) has been shown to be associated with inferior liver graft outcomes. We aimed to characterize SES and liver graft survival in our Institution.

Donor gender effect on graft function in adult Egyptian patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation: A single centre study

ABSTRACT Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of donor-to-recipient gender match in the setting of living donor liver transplant as a potential predictor of graft and recipient survivals. Methods In this retrospective, single-center study, the data of 342 adult primary liver transplants were analyzed. The donor and recipient’s characters, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were recorded. Results The donor-recipient gender matched patients had significantly better graft survival outcomes than the gender mismatched ones. The 2-year graft survival probability was 95.7% in the matched group compared to 89.1% in the mismatched one (p = 0.026). A female donor-male recipient combination (87.3%) showed worse 2-years graft survival than a male-to-male transplant (94.8%), while it gave better graft survival than male to female (61.3%). The estimated relative risk of graft rejection was 5.91 times significantly higher in a male–female combination than in a male-to-male one (Hazard ratio = 5.91, 95% CI = 1.34–26.11). Conclusion This study suggests that donor-recipient gender mismatch is associated with poor liver graft survival outcomes, with higher risk of graft rejection in male-female transplants than in male-to-male ones. Though, further larger studies including multiple datasets are needed, with adjustments for various graft, donor, and recipient factors to reach solid evidence.

Comparison of Biliary Complications Rates After Brain Death, Donation After Circulatory Death, and Living-Donor Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Cohort Study.

Donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD), donation-after-brain-death (DBD), and living-donation (LD) are the three possible options for liver transplantation (LT), each with unique benefits and complication rates. We aimed to compare DCD-, DBD-, and LD-LT-specific graft survival and biliary complications (BC). We collected data on 138 DCD-, 3,027 DBD- and 318 LD-LTs adult recipients from a single center and analyzed patient/graft survival. BC (leak and anastomotic/non-anastomotic stricture (AS/NAS)) were analyzed in a subset of 414 patients. One-/five-year graft survival were 88.6%/70.0% for DCD-LT, 92.6%/79.9% for DBD-LT, and, 91.7%/82.9% for LD-LT. DCD-LTs had a 1.7-/1.3-fold adjusted risk of losing their graft compared to DBD-LT and LD-LT, respectively (p < 0.010/0.403). Bile leaks were present in 10.1% (DCD-LTs), 7.2% (DBD-LTs), and 36.2% (LD-LTs) (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.7/4.2, p = 0.402/<0.001). AS developed in 28.3% DCD-LTs, 18.1% DBD-LTs, and 43.5% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.5/1.8, p = 0.018/0.006). NAS was present in 15.2% DCD-LTs, 1.4% DBDs-LT, and 4.3% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.1/0.3, p = 0.001/0.005). LTs w/o BC had better liver graft survival compared to any other groups with BC. DCD-LT and LD-LT had excellent graft survival despite significantly higher BC rates compared to DBD-LT. DCD-LT represents a valid alternative whose importance should increase further with machine/perfusion systems.

Comparison of Outcomes in High Donation after Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation Usage Centers in the Acuity Circles Era

INTRODUCTION: The recent acuity circles (AC) liver allocation policy has increased rates of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation. We hypothesize that transplant centers with high-volume DCD graft usage may have differing outcomes. METHODS: All adult DCD transplant recipients in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) STAR file from January 11, 2016, to September 30, 2021, were included. Living liver grafts, pediatric, and nonkidney simultaneous transplantation were excluded. The top decile of DCD transplant centers by volume per year were identified. Six-month and 1-year patient and liver graft survival were compared with bottom 90% usage centers by using propensity score–matched fine gray regression models. Outcomes were stratified by pre-AC (January 11, 2016 to February 3, 2020) and post-AC (February 4, 2020 to September 30, 2020) eras (Figure). Transplant recipients that cross eras were censored on the last day of the pre-AC era. RESULTS: Included in this study were 2,299 DCD liver transplantation recipients : 2012 in pre-AC and 287 in post-AC eras. High DCD volume (top decile) centers had significantly improved 6-month (hazard ratio 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91, p = 0.033) and 1-year (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.98, p = 0.043) patient survival in the post-AC era compared with bottom 90% centers by volume. No significant differences were noted in 6-month or 1-year liver graft survival in either era. CONCLUSION: The top decile DCD transplantation volume centers have improved 6-month and 1-year patient survival compared with the lower volume centers with the introduction of the AC policy.Figure

The development and outcomes of organ transplantation from donation after circulatory death in Taiwan

BackgroundIt is imperative to increase the donor pool due to a persistent shortfall of organs for transplantation. Therefore, organ donation after circulatory death (DCD) was reintroduced in Taiwan in 2017, and has become a rightful source for kidney and liver transplantation. We aim to report the preliminary outcomes of organ transplantation from DCD donors in Taiwan. MethodsAll data of 48 DCD donors and consecutively 106 grafts were obtained from the registry of Taiwan Organ Registry and Sharing Center. Kidney and liver transplantations were performed between Jan 5th, 2018 and Sep 24th, 2021. The primary endpoints were recipient survival and graft survival by using Kaplan-Meier method. ResultsOverall, DCD donors accounted for 9.6% (48/501) of all deceased donors in Taiwan from 2017 to 2021. The recipient survival for 3-month, 1-year, and 3-year were 99, 94, and 94% for DCD kidney transplants; 86, 76 and 76% for DCD liver transplants. The 3-month and three-year kidney graft survival (censored for death) reached 95% and 94%, respectively; while liver graft survival (censored for death) reached 95% and 89%, respectively. ConclusionsTransplantations from DCD donors showed satisfactory graft and recipient survivals in both kidney and liver transplants. Both kidney and liver transplantation from potential DCD donors should be advocated for its comparable outcomes to organs from brain-dead deceased donors.

335.3: Comparison of Outcomes of High Utilization Centers For Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation in the Acuity Circles Era

Introduction: The recent acuity circles (AC) liver allocation policy in the United States has increased rates of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation. We hypothesize transplant centers with high volume DCD graft usage may have differing outcomes. Methods: All adult DCD transplant recipients in the UNOS STAR file from Jan 11 2016 to Sept 30 2021 were included. Living liver grafts, pediatric, and non-kidney simultaneous transplantation were excluded. The top decile of DCD transplant centers by volume per year were identified. 6-month and 1-year patient and liver graft survival were compared to bottom 90% usage centers using propensity score matched fine gray regression models. Outcomes were stratified by pre-AC (1/11/2016-2/3/2020) and post-AC (2/4/2020-9/30/2020) eras. Transplant recipients that cross eras were censored on last day of the pre-AC era. Results: 2299 DCD liver transplantation recipients were included in this study, 2012 in pre-AC and 287 in post-AC eras. High DCD volume (top decile) centers had significantly improved 6-month (HR: 0.32, 95% C.I.: 0.11-0.91, P = 0.033) and 1-year (HR: 0.42, 95% C.I.: 0.17-0.98, P = 0.043) patient survival in the post-AC era compared to bottom 90% centers by volume. No significant differences were noted in 6-month or 1-year liver graft survival in either era. Conclusion: The top decile DCD transplantation volume center have improved 6-month and 1-year patient survival compared to lower volume centers with the introduction of the acuity circles policy in the United States.