Liver transplantation in patients over 60 years of age

Abstract Liver transplantation was previously only offered to patients under 60 years of age. We have analyzed the outcome after acceptance on the waiting list and after liver transplantation of patients over 60 years old. A total of 150 patients over 60 years old were listed for a first liver transplantation during 1990‐1998. The annual number increased throughout the period. Primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and acute hepatic failure were the most frequent diagnoses. A total of 119 patients received a first liver allograft. The patient 1‐year survival was 75 % and 3‐year survival 62%, which was not significantly lower (P = 0.21) than that of the younger patients. When correcting for year of transplantation, the survival was, however, moderately but significantly lower than among the younger patients. Survival among those > 65 years (n = 38) did not differ from that of patients 60‐65 years of age (n = 81). We conclude that an increasing number of patients over 60 years old can be listed for liver transplantation and receive a liver allograft with highly satisfying results.     

Liver transplantation in patients over sixty years of age.

BACKGROUND: Although some centers have reported very good patient and graft survival in liver allograft recipients, reports from both North America (United Network of Organ Sharing) and Europe (European Liver Transplantation Registry) have failed to confirm this. AIM: We have reviewed our experience of liver transplantation in older recipients and compared their clinical outcome to a younger group. METHODS: Retrospective analyses were conducted on 875 consecutive adult patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic liver disease, between 1990 and 1999. Group I consisted of patients under 60 years of age (n=701; 80.2%) and group II of patients over 60 years (n=174; 19.8%). RESULTS: The proportion of older patients transplanted increased from 10.15% between 1990-1991 to 20.85% (1997-1999). Actuarial graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 78%, 74%, and 69% and 78%, 73%, and 66% for groups I and II, respectively (P=0.49). The overall actuarial patient survival tended to be better in the younger group (1-, 3-, and 5-year survival of 83%, 79%, and 76% for group I and 81%, 75%, and 69% for group II (P=0.07). Crude mortality probability shows a stable trend until 45 years, a gradual increase in mortality between 45 and 60 years, and then the risk of death is accelerated. The same analysis shows the risk of death is between 1.5 and 2 times greater in Child C patients; this is greater in patients aged more than 66 years. CONCLUSION: There is no statistically significant difference in patient or graft survival in patients aged over 60 compared to younger recipients. However, when age is assessed as a continuous variable, an adverse effect of older age is seen on outcome and this effect is more marked in sicker patients.     

Cardiac transplantation in patients over 60 years of age

Cardiac transplant programs have routinely excluded patients over 55 years of age from consideration as transplant candidates. The Texas Heart Institute modified this policy of using age as a contraindication to transplantation. Between July, 1982, and August, 1987, a total of 200 cardiac transplants were performed, 28 (14%) of which were in patients over 60 years of age, the eldest being 66 years old at the time of transplant. Our immunosuppressive regimen consisted primarily of cyclosporine and prednisone. In 1985, azathioprine was added in an effort to decrease dosages of cyclosporine, thereby decreasing its associated nephrotoxicity. The incidences of rejection and infection were 1.2 and 1.4 episodes/patient, respectively, for those over 60 years of age versus 1.7 and 1.3 episodes/patient, respectively, for those less than 60 years of age. Of the 28 patients, 23 are alive and well. Four deaths were caused by infection, and the other by diffuse coronary arteritis. The one-year actuarial survival for patients over 60 years of age was 83%, compared with 75% for the other transplant patients. We conclude that persons over 60 years of age can undergo cardiac transplantation with results equal to or perhaps better than those of other heart transplant patients. Our experience suggests that advanced age should not be considered a major contraindication to cardiac transplantation.     

老年患者的肝移植

目的探讨老年患者接受肝移植治疗的特点并分析其术后生存时间。方法2000年1月至2005年8月,共施行18岁以上成人首次肝脏移植1424例。将年龄≥60岁的211例受者分为老年组,其余的1213例受者为成年组。统计分析两组患者术前、术中指标及术后生存时间。结果单因素分析比较发现,老年组患者术前合并消化道出血的比例及术前血清胆红素总量、凝血酶原时间低于成年组,手术过程和无肝期时间较成年组略短。老年组术后急性排斥反应发生率(13.27%)和再次移植率(0.95%)低于成年组(19.37%,P=0.035;3.96%,P=0.028)。成年组术后6个月、1年、2年、3年、4年及5年累积生存率分别为88.67%、85.52%、77.53%、75.52%、73.77%和70.9%,老年组术后6个月、1年、2年及4年累积生存率分别为87.91%、83.42%、78.70%和40.14%,两组生存时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.697)。对患者术后生存时间采用Cox比例风险模型进行多因素分析,影响肝移植术后生存时间的危险因素是:原发恶性肝病(P=0.000)、合并肝肾综合征(P =0.021)、供肝热缺血时间(P=0.046)以及术后发生感染(P=0.000)。结论高龄不再是肝移植的禁忌证,合理筛选适宜手术的老年受者可获得与成年受者相近的术后存活时间。     

老年患者肝移植问题的研究

目的 总结老年患者（≥60岁）肝移植的疗效及相关问题。方法 回顾性分析59例≥60岁（i〉60岁组）及500例〈60岁（〈60岁组）接受原位肝移植术患者的临床资料,比较其术前、术中、术后相关数据和1年生存率等。结果 ≥60岁组1年生存率（66％）与〈60组（76％）的差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;两组手术时间、术中失血量、住院时间、肝动脉血栓发生率差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;≥60岁组急性排斥反应率低于〈60岁组,ICU停留时间、机械辅助通气时间长于〈60岁组,术后感染、脑出血发生率较〈60岁组高。老年患者肝移植术后的主要死因是感染和脑出血。结论 老年患者肝移植疗效满意,但术后并发症发生率较高。     

Metabolic surgery in patients over 60 years old: short- and long-term results

Purpose: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass can treat obesity related comorbidities and can prolong life expectancy. It remains unclear whether this type of surgery is also indicated in obese patients with advanced age.

Materials and methods: In this retrospective monocentric study, we investigated the morbidity and outcomes of weight and metabolic control of bariatric surgery in patients older than 60 years and compared these findings with those of younger patients.

Results: At 18 months after RY gastric bypass, weight losses of respectively 30?±?11% and 34?±?9% of total initial body weight were measured in the older and younger patients (p?p?=?0.11). There was no mortality in either group, but there were significantly more complications and there was a longer hospital stay in the older patients.

Conclusion: RY gastric bypass comes with a significantly higher morbidity and hospital stay in older patients, but weight loss and improvement of DM are similar as in the younger patients.     

Liver transplantation in patients aged 65 and over: a case–control study

Montalti R, Rompianesi G, Di Benedetto F, Ballarin R, Gerring RC, Busani S, De Pietri L, De Ruvo N, Iemmolo RM, Guerrini GP, Smerieri N, Gerunda GE. Liver transplantation in patients aged 65 and over: a case–control study.
Clin Transplant 2010 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399‐0012.2010.01230.x.
© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Introduction: The average age of patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) is consistently increasing. The aim of this case–control study is to evaluate survival and outcome of patients ≥65 yr compared to younger patients undergoing LT. Materials and methods: From 10/00 to 4/08 we performed 330 primary LT, 31 (9.4%) of these were in patients aged 65–70. Following a case–control approach, we compared these patients with 31 patients aged between 41 and 64 yr and matched according to sex, LT indication, viral status, cadaveric/living donor, LT timing, and Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in demographic and surgical donor characteristics. The mean MELD score was under 18 in both groups. Post‐LT complications occurred with a similar incidence in the two groups. one‐, three‐, and five‐yr survival was 83.9%, 80.6%, and 80.6%, respectively, for the elderly group, and 80.6%, 73.8%, and 73.8%, respectively, for the young group (p = 0.61). Discussion: Patients aged between 65 and 70 with low MELD score who undergo LT have the same short‐ and middle‐term survival expectancy, morbidity, and outcome quality as younger patients with the same indication and same pre‐LT pathology severity, whatever they might be. Thus, chronological age alone should not deter LT workup in patients >65 and <70.     

Renal transplantation in patients over 60 years of age: a single-center experience

The prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) increases with advancing age. In most countries renal transplant recipients are getting older, too. Transplantation must be considered for ESRD patients older than 60 years; however, there are few data regarding outcomes in this population. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of recipients aged > or =60 years (n = 43) who underwent primary or repeated grafts from August 1988 to December 2004. We then compared recipient and donor characteristics as well as graft and patient survivals with recipients aged 18 to 59 years (n = 1058) who were transplanted during the same time. Donor age tended to be higher among the oldest recipient group (P < .001). Mean follow-up was significantly shorter in the group aged > or =60 years (P < .001), as our institution only recently has frequently accepted patients > or =60 years. Older recipients showed more frequent delayed graft function (P = .007), longer initial hospitalization (P = .005), and a significantly lower incidence of posttransplant acute rejection episodes (P = .015). Patient (P = .057), graft (P = .407), and death-censored graft (P = .649) survivals were not different between the two groups. Seven recipients aged > or =60 years died; the main cause of which was cardiovascular in origin. The loss of organs (n = 11) in the older patients was mainly due to death with a functioning kidney (54.5%). Our results confirm that renal transplant must be considered in selected patients older than 60 years as patient and graft survivals are similar to those of younger patients.     

Renal transplantation in recipients over 65 years old

Background and Purpose

Older patients on hemodialysis have become candidates for renal transplantation, particularly in the period of increasing numbers of marginal donors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term and long-term results of renal transplantation among recipients ≥65 years old for comparison with these in younger patients.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively studied 1,796 renal transplantations performed between June 1991 and May 2010, dividing the sample into 2 groups: ≥65 years old (n = 89) versus <65 years old (n = 1,707).

Results

The mean ages were 42.17 and 67.45 years for the younger and older groups, respectively. Time of pretransplantation dialysis was significantly greater among the older group (52.76 vs 47.69 mo). There were no differences between the 2 groups regarding donor age, donor renal function, or cold ischemia times. After a mean follow-up of 73.37 versus 39.73 months for the younger versus older groups, respectively, we observed differences in initial graft function, with a greater rate of delayed graft function in the ≥65 group (28.1% vs 17.8%), and in acute rejection rate, which was higher among the younger group (19.4% vs 10.1%). Initial creatinine was better for the older group (1.71 vs 2.10 mg/dL), but similar between the groups at 10 years. Graft and patient survivals at 1, 5, and 10 years were lower among the older group. When analyzing graft survival censored for death with a functioning kidney, there were no differences between the younger and older groups: It was at 1, 5, and 10 years, namely 93.6% versus 90.6%, 87% versus 80.8%, and 76.7% versus 70.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

Selected recipients ≥65 years of age show good outcomes of transplantation.     

Results of kidney transplantation in patients over 60 years of age]

In the same measure as the age of population is growing, the importance of the problems rising by the renal transplantation in elder persons is increasing. At the University Hospital of Zurich 1313 kidney transplantations were performed between 1964 and 1990, 44 of them to patients who at the moment of operation were older than 60 years of age. The actuarial patient survival after 3 months reached 81%, after 1 year 74% and after 5 years 42%. The actuarial allograft survival after 3 months was 75%, after 1 year 67%, after 5 years 40%. The mortality was 131 per 1000, the mortality ratio compared to a standard population 6 times higher. The main causes of death were infections (52%) and cardiovascular diseases (28%). These results explain our opinion, that renal transplantation in elder patients should be indicated retentively.     

Renal transplantation in patients 65 years old or older.

Between January 1982 and August 1989, cadaveric renal transplantation was performed in 22 patients 65 years old or older. Mean recipient age was 68 years (range 65 to 73 years). There were 17 men and 5 women. Additional risk factors included retransplantation (3 patients), high (greater than 30%) panel reactive antibody (4) and diabetes (1). All patients received cyclosporine as part of the immunosuppressive regimen. The 3-year actuarial patient and allograft survival rates were 89% and 71%, respectively. There were 6 graft losses due to chronic rejection (2 patients), renal vein thrombosis (1), myocardial infarction (1), withdrawal of immunosuppression because of sepsis (1) and primary nonfunction (1). Of the 16 patients with a functioning graft 12 currently have a serum creatinine of less than 2.0 mg./dl. These results suggest that cadaveric renal transplantation is an acceptable form of treatment for patients older than 65 years with end stage renal disease.     

Burns in patients over 60 years old: epidemiology and mortality.

Epidemiology and mortality among burn patients over age 60 years who were admitted to the Burn Centre of La Fé Hospital (Valencia, Spain) between 1 January 1988 and 1 January 1991 have been studied. A total of 443 patients (7.8 per cent of all presenting patients) were hospitalized during this 3-year period; of these, 69 (15.5 per cent) were over 60 years old. There were 40 females and 29 males (mean age, 72.2 years). Mean burn area was 21.6 per cent of total body surface, and the most commonly involved regions were the lower limbs (81 per cent). Fire flames were the most common cause of burns (65.2 per cent) and produced the most extensive lesions. Eight-five per cent of the accidents occurred at home, and winter was the season of highest incidence. Patient mortality was 33.3 per cent, the most common causes of which were hypovolaemic shock during the first 24 h and pneumonia in the later stages.