Liver transplantation using donors older than 80 years: a single-center experience

AIM: The shortage of organs for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has forced transplantation centers to expand the donor pool by using donors traditionally labeled as "extended criteria donors." One such example is OLT using a donor with advanced age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 10 patients who received a liver graft from cadaveric donors older than 80 years. We analyzed pretransplantation donor and recipient characteristics, as well as the evolution of the recipients. RESULTS: All 10 donors were older than 80 years (median age, 83.5; range, 80-93). No steatosis (>30%) was accepted in the older donor group. Medium follow-up was 19.5 months. The most frequent cause for OLT was hepatitis C virus (HCV) cirrhosis (8/10 patients). We had 1 case of primary nonfunction, 1 patient died immediately after surgery because of extrahepatic complications (cardiac arrest), and 2 other patients had a severe HCV recurrence and died after 1 and 2 years from OLT, respectively. Five patients had HCV recurrence and biliary complications were present in 60% of the patients. No cases of acute or chronic rejection were described. Overall survival rates after 1 and 3 years were 80% and 40%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Old donor age is not an absolute contraindication to OLT. Liver grafts from donors older than 80 years can be used knowing that there is a high risk of postoperative complications. Furthermore, the increased risk of developing severe HCV recurrence, related to older donor age, suggests that such livers should be used in HCV-negative recipients.     

Donors older than 70 years in liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION: Expansion of donor criteria has become necessary with the increasing number of liver transplantation candidates, as aged donors who have been considered to yield marginal organs. METHODS: Our database of 477 liver transplants (OLT) included 55 cases performed from donors at least 70 years old vs 422 with younger donors. We analyzed pretransplantation donor and recipient characteristics as well as evolution of the recipients. RESULTS: The old donor group showed significantly lower ALT (23 +/- 17 vs 48.9 +/- 67; P = .0001) and LDH (444 +/- 285 vs 570 +/- 329; P = .01). There was a trend toward fewer hypotensive events in the aged donor group (27.2% vs 40.5%; P = .07). No steatosis (>10%) was accepted in the old donor group. Cold ischemia time was statistically shorter for the aged donors (297 +/- 90 minutes vs 346 +/- 139 minutes; P = .03). With these selected donors, the results were not different for primary nonfunction, arterial and biliary complications, hospitalization, acute reoperation or acute retransplantation, and hospital mortality when donors > or =70 years old were compared to younger donors. Functional cholestasis, neither related to rejection nor to biliary complications, was seen more frequently in old donor recipients (40% vs 22%; P = .03). No differences in 1, and 3 year survivals were observed between recipients of donors over 70 years old and these of younger organs: 93.8% and 90.6% vs 90.7% and 82.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: When using selected donors > or =70 years old the outcomes were comparable to those obtained with younger donors. Strict selection is necessary to achieve good long-term survival.     

Extended donor criteria have no negative impact on early outcome after liver transplantation: a single-center multivariate analysis

The organ shortage has driven many transplant centers to accept extended donor criteria and to modify graft allocation policies. This study was designed to analyze the impact of applying extended donor criteria (EDC) in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Between December 2001 and December 2004, we performed 165 primary cadaveric whole OLTs. Up to three EDC, that is, ventilation >7 days; aminotransferases (ALT or AST) >3 x normal; bilirubin >3 mg/dL; anti-HBc or HBs Ag positivity; donor age >65 years; liver steatosis >40%; donor body mass index >30; cold ischemia time >14 hours; peak serum Na(+) >165 mmol/L; history of extrahepatic malignancy; or previous drug abuse were present in 55% of all grafts. Both univariate and multivariate analysis revealed that EDC status had no effect on graft or patient survival, the necessity for retransplantation, the length of intensive care/intermediate care unit stay, mechanical ventilation, complications, or posttransplant laboratory findings. Recipient age of >/=55 years was the only independent prognostic factor for survival, regardless of EDC. These findings suggested that the use of grafts from EDC donors are safe and expand the donor pool.     

Liver replacement with reduced size donor organs

End stage liver disease in children can be treated with orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Nevertheless, the expansion of this therapy in Europe has been limited because of the shortage of appropriate size-matched donors. One possible technical solution is the OLT of a liver graft previously reduced in size by in situ resection preceding the harvesting procedure. To study the impact of this technique we examined two different operative procedures performed on Landrace pigs. Group 1 consisted of 20 standard donor/recipient weight matched OLT. In group 2, 15 OLT were performed using right lateral and medial lobes (55% of the original donor liver). The donor/recipient weight ratio in the group was 2:1. Cold ischemia times were 90 +/- 16 min for group 1 and 98 +/- 9 min for group 2. It is emphasized that in contrast to all the other reports using resected liver grafts for OLT, the donor resection in our study was always performed in situ under normothermic conditions, preceding the harvesting procedure. This was designed to reduce the cold ischemia time. No significant technical problems were encountered. The biochemical results of group 2 pigs compared to group 1 demonstrate an analogous, postoperative course. This might be explained by regenerative stimuli acting on the resected liver tissues and enhancing their metabolic function. These data support the conclusion that resected adult donor liver grafts may be used for pediatric transplant recipients.     

Influence of marginal donors on liver preservation injury

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the accumulated effects of marginal donor quality factors on liver preservation injury (LPI). METHODS: The most recent 400 consecutive liver transplantations at our institution were reviewed. Marginal liver donor criteria included the following: older than 60 years, an intensive care unit stay under ventilatory support for more than 4 days, a cold ischemia time more than 14 hr, high inotropic drug use, prolonged hypotensive episodes for more than 1 hr and less than 60 mm Hg, a peak serum sodium more than 155 mEq/L, and high levels of bilirubin, alanine transferase, or amino transferase. The type of steatosis (macrovesicular or microvesicular) was quantified in four categories: no steatosis, mild (<30%), moderate (30-60%), and severe (> 60%). LPI was stratified histologically in four levels: no damage, mild, moderate, and severe injury. These variables were included in a logistic regression analysis for prediction of the probability of the appearance of LPI. RESULTS: Five variables showed an independent influence on LPI: high inotropic drug use (odds ratio [OR]=1.56), donor age (OR=1.017 per year), moderate to severe macrovesicular steatosis (OR=3.63), cold ischemia time (OR=1,109 per hour), and prolonged stay in an intensive care unit (OR=1.79). Severe LPI was present in 32.7% of the grafts from donors without any factor of the model; in 46.8% from donors with one factor (P =0.09); in 66.2% from donors with two factors (P =0.006); and in 78.3% from donors with at last three factors (P =0.002) (global P=0.0001; chi2 =21.8). CONCLUSIONS: LPI can be potentially predicted based on donor and graft conditions. Accumulation of factors is correlated with an increased effect on LPI.     

Impact of cumulative risk factors for expanded criteria donors on early survival after liver transplantation

There are various options to help overcome the organ shortage, including performing transplants using grafts from marginal donors with characteristics previously described as unacceptable because of the high risk of graft failure. Nowadays, expanded criteria donors for liver transplantation (OLT) is a strategy used routinely by many teams. Some donor features have been suggested to jeopardize initial function or survival; when these features are aggregated, they may impact prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of donor risk factors on early patient survival and retransplantation. Donor risk factors were considered to be older than 60 years, body mass index > 30, serum sodium level > 155 mEq/L, cold ischemia time > 12 hours, and intensive care unit stay > 4 days. We prospectively recorded data from 139 patients who underwent 152 OLT from March 2003 to May 2007. Patients were classified into four groups: I, no risk factors; II, one risk factor; III, two risk factors; IV, three or more risk factors. Retransplantation or OLT due to acute liver failure was considered to be an exclusion criterion. Early overall survival rate was 83.76%; 12 retransplantations were required (10.25%). Comparing the four groups, patient survivals (P = .41) and retransplantation rates (P = .518) were similar. In conclusion, cumulative risk factors showed no impact on early (30-day) recipient survival and or on the necessity of retransplantation after OLT.     

Analysis of clinical variables of donors and recipients with respect to short-term graft outcome in human liver transplantation

Donor and recipient factors are closely associated with graft survival after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This study was performed to analyze clinical characteristics of recipients and donors, which affect 30-day graft loss after OLT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eighty-six livers from heart-beating donors were accepted between May 1997 and June 1998 at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Donor variables that were analyzed included age, sex, cold ischemia time (CIT), warm ischemia time (WIT), imported versus local procurement, cardiopulmonary arrest, serum sodium level, and dopamine dose. The recipient characteristics included native liver disease and UNOS status. Two-sided Fisher exact test and stepwise logistic regression were used for univariate and multivariate analyses. P-values < .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Twenty-eight grafts (15.1%) were lost within 30 days of OLT. The following factors were found to adversely affect graft survival: donor sodium > 155 mEq/L (P = .002); CIT > 12 hours (P = .002); WIT > 45 minutes (P = .002); and imported liver graft (P = .048). Logistic regression revealed that donor sodium (odds ratio, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.05 to 8.74), CIT (OR 1.20; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.38), WIT (OR 1.06; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09) were independent predictors of early graft loss. CONCLUSION: Donor hypernatremia as well as warm and cold ischemia times independently affect graft outcomes in the early postoperative period after OLT. Avoidance of long preservation and correction of donor sodium level are recommended to optimize results and survival in OLT.     

The marginal donor: a single-center experience in orthotopic liver transplantation

The use of marginal donors has become more common worldwide due to the sharp increase in recipients with a consequent shortage of suitable organs. The definition of "marginal donor" has not been reached by all centers. We herein analyzed our single-center experience over the last 3 years in liver transplantation (OLT) to evaluate the outcomes of using a high percentage of so-called "marginal donors", according to the current classification from the National (Italian) Center of Transplantation (CNT). Among the 78 OLT performed in 77 patients from January 1, 2003 to October 31, 2005, donor livers were divided into three groups according to the CNT classification. We evaluated donor variables, cold ischemia time (CIT), warm ischemia time (WIT), MELD score, and length of hospital stay. Histologic graft steatosis was correlated with estimated steatosis by ultrasound. There were no differences among the three graft recipient groups concerning CIT, WIT, MELD score, and the length of hospital stay. Steatosis is indicated in all series as a definite variable for a higher risk of postoperative mortality. CIT is necessarily related to donor retrieval policy and organization. Donor age seemed also to be related to a possible increase in postoperative mortality, but there are significant variations in the definition of the age limit. We failed to observe a correlation between a higher mortality rate and any of the variables currently listed to define a "marginal donor." A shorter CIT seemed to positively influence the role played by the other variables identifying a "marginal liver." Finally, the use of HCV(+) or HBV(+) grafts did not lead to an increased mortality.     

The use of older donor livers for hepatic transplantation

The function and outcome of liver grafts from "older" donors (more than 50 years old) were compared with grafts from younger donors (less than 50 years old). Of 184 consecutive liver transplants, 23 grafts were from older donors (50.2-65.3 years, mean 54.3 years). The liver preservation period was short, averaging less than 4 hr with the maximum under 8 hr for the older grafts. The majority of livers were preserved with Collins' solution. All transplants were performed using consistent methods that had proved to be successful over time. The medical status of the patients who received the older and younger grafts was similar but a higher percentage of older grafts were transplanted into ABO blood group--incompatible recipients. Graft function--as determined by peak aminotransferase levels, duration of prolonged prothrombin time, retransplantation rate within 30 days and incidence of primary nonfunction--was not significantly different in older versus younger grafts. Actual 30-day graft survival was 86.9% in the older grafts and 85.1% in the younger grafts. Actuarial 1-year graft and patient survival rates were 65.0% and 71.4%, respectively, in recipients of older grafts and 68.8% and 75.6%, respectively, in recipients of younger grafts. It is concluded that donor livers older than 50 years can be transplanted with the same success as younger livers provided that other generally accepted donor criteria are satisfied and the preservation period is short. The upper age limit for liver donation is not yet known.     

Use of older controlled non-heart-beating donors for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Use of liver grafts from non-heart-beating donors (NHBDs) warrants consideration so to expand the donor pool. Because the results of controlled NHBDs (CNHBDs) were acceptable, we have recently tried to expand the criteria to older CNHBDs. Here, we report our experience using liver grafts from older CNHBDs. METHODS: We retrospectively studied our donor records from June 1994 through December 2001. CNHBDs were divided into two groups by age: older donors (O) were more than or equal to 55 years old, and younger donors (Y) were less than 55 years old. We compared donor and recipient demographics and peak laboratory values during the first postoperative week. RESULTS: Twenty-five grafts from CNHBDs were transplanted in our center. Five livers were harvested from O (63+/-6 years) and 20 were from Y (32+/-15 years). No differences other than age in donor characteristics were noted between O and Y. Mean age of recipients was 50 years in both groups. Mean cold ischemic time (CIT) was 5.4 hours in O and 7.3 hours in Y (P<.05). Peak glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (U/L), glutamic pyruvic transaminase (U/L), bilirubin (mg/dL), and prothrombin time (sec) during the first postoperative week were 611, 500, 3.9, and 16 in O and 846, 593, 5.9, and 17 in Y. There were no significant differences between the two groups. The graft survival at 1 year was 80% in O and 70% in Y. CONCLUSIONS: In our preliminary experience, recipients of liver grafts from older CNHBDs had an outcome equivalent to that of younger CNHBDs. With the strict evaluation of the donors and brief CIT, liver grafts from older CNHBDs may be used to expand the donor pool.     

心脏死亡供体经典原位肝移植的单中心临床研究

目的总结心脏死亡器官捐献（donation after cardiac death,DCD）供体供肝获取及应用于肝移植的临床经验和可行性。方法2011年11月至2012年9月,西安交通大学第一附属医院采用Maastricht标准或中国标准,共获取18例DCD供肝,于该院完成经典原位肝移植14例,送往其他移植中心3例,放弃1例。对18例供体与在该院完成肝移植的14例受体的临床资料进行回顾性分析,了解供肝情况、受体围手术期及随访结果。结果18例供体中符合Maastricht标准Ⅲ类5例、V类2例,符合中国标准Ⅲ类（即脑一心双死亡标准器官捐献,donation after brain death plus cardiac death, DBCD）11例。按规范器官获取流程取得供肝。供肝的热缺血时间为11～18min,平均为14．5min;冷缺血时间为90—600min,平均为350min。14例受体均顺利完成移植手术。其中12例受体预后良好,肝功能逐渐恢复,未出现原发性移植肝无功能、血栓形成、排斥反应,但2例出现胆道狭窄并发症,经胆道支架置人术后引流通畅;重症监护室（ICU）治疗时间平均7d,术后住院时间平均23d,病情稳定后出院。1例受体术后2d死于肝衰竭,其供体原发病为冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病,需给予大量多巴胺维持其血压;另1例于术后当日死于腹腔内大出血,其供体为重症哮喘、心肺复苏后死亡。12例受体者平均随访时间为6个月,总体存活率为85％,肿瘤患者尚未发现复发转移。结论DCD可以扩大供肝来源且近期效果良好,具有可行性。实施可控型DCD捐献,严格掌握供者适应证、加强器官评估、缩短热缺血时间和冷缺血时间,是保障供肝质量的重要因素。     

Occult hepatitis B virus infection in liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C: relationship with donor age and fibrosis progression

Abstract:  Liver transplantation (OLT) recipients who receive a graft from donors positive for hepatitis B virus (HBV) anti-core antibodies may develop overt " de novo " HBV infection. The study was undertaken to explore how often HBV infection may remain occult after OLT for hepatitis C, and whether it may represent a factor of graft fibrosis progression. We studied 30 consecutive patients transplanted for hepatitis C liver disease. Specimens from the native liver and from the graft were searched for occult HBV infection (O-HBV). In the native liver, 8/30 patients had detectable O-HBV; during the follow-up, O-HBV infection was demonstrated in 14 graft specimens. Graft O-HBV was associated with older donor age (≥50 yr; 8/9 vs. 6/21, p < 0.005). Recipients with graft O-HBV and no O-HBV in the native liver who received their grafts from donors aged >40 yr had faster fibrosis progression than recipients with no post-transplant O-HBV, whose grafts came from donors aged >40 yr and recipients whose grafts came from donors aged ≤40 yr (4/7 vs. 1/7 vs. 2/16, p < 0.05). In OLT recipients, O-HBV is more likely to occur when grafts are obtained from aged donors and may affect the rate of fibrosis progression because of recurrent hepatitis C.     

Can the use of marginal liver donors change recipient survival rate?

Liver transplantation as a therapeutic method for the treatment of end-stage liver disease is beclouded by a scarcity of organs. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze the relation between the classification of donors as marginal versus ideal and recipients survival after 148 of 197 orthotopic liver transplantations (OLT) performed from 1991 to 2001. Donors were classified as marginal if they showed the major criteria of: age over 55 years, aspartate aminotransferase greater than 150 UI/L; serum bilirubin greater than 2 mg/dL, serum sodium greater 150 mEq/L, high-dose dopamine or any other vasoactive amine, cardiac arrest, intensive care unit (ICU) stay over 5 days, and moderate severe macrosteatosis. The minor criteria for a marginal donor were: use of dopamine below 10 microg/kg/min, history of alcoholism, drug abuse, ICU stays less than 4 days, microsteatosis of any degree, and mild macrosteatosis. Statistical analysis was performed using Cox regression analyzing and the Kaplan-Meier survival method. The rate of marginal donors was 61.5%. The 180 postoperative day survival was 77.0%. Survival rates were 81.1% for recipients of marginal donor organs, and 70.7% for ideal donor recipients (P >.05). In conclusion, the use of marginal liver donors is viable and safely expands the numbers of liver transplants, thereby diminishing the number of waiting list deaths.     

Increased transplantation of kidneys with multiple renal arteries in the laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy era: surgical technique and surgical and nonsurgical donor and recipient outcomes

BACKGROUND: For anatomical and technical reasons, many transplant centers restrict laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (in contrast with open live donor nephrectomy) to left kidneys. HYPOTHESIS: This change in surgical practice increases procurement and transplantation rates of live donor kidneys with multiple renal arteries (RAs), without affecting donor and recipient outcomes. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective review at an academic tertiary care referral center comparing laparoscopically procured single vs multiple-RA kidney grafts (April 1997 to October 2000). PATIENTS: Seventy-nine consecutive left laparoscopic live kidney donors and 78 transplant recipients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Donor and recipient complications and postoperative length of stay; cold and warm ischemia time; operating time; short-term and long-term graft function; and survival. RESULTS: We noted multiple RAs in 21 (27%) of all kidneys. The proportion of donors with 1 or more perioperative complications was 19% in the single-RA group vs 10% in the multiple-RA group (P was not significant). For the recipients, we noted no significant differences between groups with respect to surgical complications, quality of early and late graft function, rejection rates, graft losses (all immunologic), and graft survival. Cold and warm ischemia time and length of stay were similar for donors and recipients in both groups. Median operating times were significantly longer for the multiple-RA vs single-RA group (difference, 41 minutes for donors and 45 minutes for recipients; P<.02). CONCLUSIONS: While the introduction of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy has significantly increased the number of grafts with multiple RAs (compared with historical open controls), this change in practice is safe for both donors and recipients from a patient outcome-based perspective. However, from an economic perspective, the longer operating time associated with multiple-RA grafts provides strong added rationale for optimization of surgical instruments and techniques to make right-sided laparoscopic nephrectomy a routine intervention.     

Orthotopic liver transplantation and living donors. An experimental study in the dog

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) using partial grafts harvested from living donors would represent a further alternative to the limited supply of hepatic grafts, especially in pediatrics. We report herein the results of an original technique of living donor OLT that we have developed in the dog. This study was conducted in male mongrel dogs weighing 25-30 kg for the donors and 10-15 kg for the recipients. The donor operation consisted in harvesting the left lobe of the liver as a graft. The recipient operation consisted in the implantation of the graft in the orthotopic position after total hepatectomy with preservation of the inferior vena cava. Ten survival experiments were undertaken. The first donor died of infected liver necrosis of the quadrate lobe. All other donors survived without major complication. Among the 10 grafts, only 9 were used. Substantial survival could be obtained in 3 dogs. On recipient survived for 48 hours and 2 for 24 hours but their graft was functioning and producing bile. Two dogs died intraoperatively. The 4 other recipients developed an outflow block of the graft after reperfusion leading to lethal hemorrhage from the transected surface. This work is, to our knowledge, the first experimental study of OLT using living donors. It provides a technical basis to the clinical use of living hepatic allograft donors which otherwise depends on ethical issues.     

Donor age does not influence 12-month outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation

Objective

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is the most effective treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease to date. The discrepancy between the numbers of donor livers and recipients has become a significant problem, resulting in a high patient mortality on the waiting list. Due to this, an expansion of the donor pool is necessary, for example, by accepting donor grafts from elderly donors. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome after OLT depending on donor age.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of 272 full-size cadaveric initial single OLTs within 12 months after OLT. The outcome was analyzed by dividing the collective into four donor age categories: donor age under 50, between 50 and 59, between 60 and 69, and 70 years or above. The outcome after OLT in these patients was retrospectively reviewed by using a prospective database. Patients positive for hepatitis C were excluded from the analysis.

Results

No increase of initial nonfunction was observed. Furthermore, no significant differences with regard to surgical complications and serum liver parameter were observed between the groups. Neither patient mortality rates nor rejection rates were different between the groups. However, ischemic-type biliary lesion rates increased significantly with donor age over 70 years (P < .05).

Conclusions

The acceptance of liver grafts from older donors is a possible alternative to narrow the gap between donated and required organs. Safe use under optimal protocols is necessary to avoid a deterioration of post-OLT results.     

Liver transplantation from an uncontrolled non-heart-beating donor maintained on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Liver transplantation, a definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease, has achieved excellent results. However, potential recipients on the waiting list outnumber donors. To expand the donor pool, marginal grafts from older donors, steatotic livers, and non-heart-beating liver donors (NHBD) have been used for transplantation. Reducing the warm ischemia time of NHBD is the critical factor in organs preservation. Liver transplantation using grafts from NHBD have been reported to display a high incidence of primary graft nonfunction and biliary complications. The authors report a liver graft donor who was maintained on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) after successful cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Core body temperature was 5 degrees C. Procurement of the liver using a rapid flush technique was performed 4 hours after instituting ECMO. Graft function recovered fully after transplantation. In conclusion, ECMO may be used to reduce warm ischemia time in liver grafts obtained from uncontrolled NHBD, thereby increasing graft salvage rates.     

Acceptance of marginal liver donors increases the volume of liver transplant: early results of a single-center experience

To expand the donor pool, clinicians are continually modifying criteria to accept organs, particularly those in the so-called expanded or marginal donor pool. The concept and definition of a marginal donors continues to evolve. The impact of their use is the result of a combination of donor and recipient factors. Most clinicians accept steatosis above 30%, donor age over 60 years, prolonged ischemia time, prolonged intensive care unit stay, hypernatremia, previous cardiac arrest, prolonged episodes of hypotension, large use of inotrope drugs, and elevated liver function tests as criteria for designation of a marginal organ. In June 2003, we started to use marginal donors each year tripling the number of transplants per year at our center.     

Use of hepatitis C virus-positive grafts in liver transplantation: a single-centre experience

AIM: Our goal was to evaluate the outcome of HCV(+) recipients after liver transplantation (LT) using HCV(+) donors and the interaction between donor and recipient viral strain. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 21 LT performed between 1998 and 2004 using livers from HCV(+) donors in HCV(+) recipients. Two hundred thirty-seven patients with HCV cirrhosis who underwent LT with livers from HCV(-) donors were the control group. Ishak score (IS) was evaluated for all HCV(+) grafts. The considered variables included donor age, hepatic enzymes, intensive care unit stay, HCV genotype, ischemia time, recipient age, UNOS status, Child score, HCV genotype (before and 6 months after LT) and IS (after LT). We analyzed patient, graft, and disease-free survival. RESULTS: HCV(+) donors were significantly older than HCV(-) donors. The cumulative 5-year patient and graft survivals and disease free intervals were not different between groups. IS grading was more than 2/18 in two cases; the only graft with a staging score over 2/6 was retransplanted for early nonfunction. In two cases, different HCV genotypes were matched and donor strain took over the recipient strain. In one patient, donor genotyping 2a-2c took over recipient genotyping 1b and 9 months after LT recurrent hepatitis was documented, but antiviral therapy cleared HCV. CONCLUSIONS: Livers from HCV(+) donors can safely be used in HCV(+) recipients. Hepatic biopsy must always be performed; livers with bridging fibrosis should not be used. The takeover of one strain by another may change the prognosis of the patient if the predominant strain is more sensitive to antiviral therapy.     

Use of hepatitis B core antibody-positive donors in orthotopic liver transplantation

HYPOTHESIS: Hepatic allografts from donors positive for antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) frequently transmit hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection to recipients. Therefore, most transplantation centers will not use these organs for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Although it is expensive and not always efficacious, hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) has been used routinely for indefinite periods to prevent HBV infection in liver allograft recipients. We assessed the effectiveness of long-term use of a nucleoside analog, lamivudine, in preventing HBV transmission by anti-HBc-positive allografts. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: A tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Twelve patients received hepatic allografts from anti-HBc-positive donors at Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, between February 23, 1998, and March 13, 2001. INTERVENTION: All patients received 10 000 U/d of intravenous HBIG for 7 days. In addition, they received 300 mg/d of lamivudine in divided doses. Their liver biopsy specimens were tested for HBV DNA, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb). Serum samples from the donor and recipient were tested for HBcAb, HBV DNA, and hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The incidence of HBV infection in recipients who received HBcAb-positive donor livers and lamivudine prophylaxis. RESULTS: All recipients were anti-HBc negative before OLT. Five of the recipients had HBsAb titers greater than 150 U at the time of OLT. Three of the donor livers were HBV DNA positive and 2 were hepatitis B core antigen positive at the time of OLT. Donor serum was HBcAb positive in all 12 donors. None of the recipients have become infected with HBV with a follow-up of 2 to 38 months. CONCLUSION: Perioperative use of HBIG combined with long-term use of lamivudine can prevent HBV infection in recipients who receive hepatic allografts from HBcAb-positive donors.