Morbidity and mortality in liver retransplantation

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of orthotopic liver retransplantation (re-OLT) ranges from 6% to 11%. The most frequent causes of early re-OLT are allograft failure, uncontrolled acute rejection, and vascular complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 512 orthotopic liver transplants (OLTs) in 482 patients over 15 years. RESULTS: The incidence of re-OLT was 6.6%, with a higher percentage of men requiring re-OLT than first-time OLT (75.0% vs 63.0%, P < .05). The reasons for re-OLT were thrombosis 21.7%, aneurysm 6.5%, stenosis 3.2%, primary nonfunction (PNF) 21.7%, and chronic rejection or recurrence of the initial disease 40.4%. Complications included PNF (22.0%), acute renal failure (65.6%), postoperative infection (87.5%), and adult respiratory distress syndrome (9.4%; P < .05). No differences were seen in the incidence of septicemia or postoperative hemorrhage. The average survival was much lower in re-OLT (21.8 days) compared with OLT (194.5 days; P < .05). The mortality rates in re-OLT were 100% for primary biliary cirrhosis, 85.7% for HCV, 50% for alcoholic cirrhosis, and 20% for HBV. A direct association between the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and the number of complications was present. DISCUSSION: There was a greater requirement for re-OLT in men and those patients transplanted due to hepatitis B virus cirrhosis and fulminant hepatitis (P < .05). The re-OLT patients had no greater incidence of sepsis compared with the OLT patients, although they did have a greater incidence of primary graft dysfunction, acute renal failure, adult respiratory distress syndrome, and postoperative infection (P < .05). The MELD was a good parameter for predicting graft evolution. Re-OLT in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus was associated with a high degree of mortality.     

Results of retransplantation for primary nonfunction in a single center

Introduction

Early graft dysfunction has a negative impact on allograft and patient survivals, evolving to retransplantation or death in the majority of cases. The outcome of a second liver transplant is usually worse than the first procedure. Considering the increasing number of recipients on the waiting list, and the discrepancy between the number of accessible donors and recipients, we sought to analyze the results of retransplantation at our institution and at those within the State of Sao Paulo.

Methods

We reviewed the data of 419 deceased donor transplants on 367 patients from June 2005 to April 2010. Twenty-three patients underwent retransplantation due primary nonfunction (PNF) or early graft dysfunction. The following variables were studied: age, gender, disease that lead to the first transplant, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score on the day before the retransplantation, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and duration of orotracheal intubation (OTI). We compared our patient survival at 30 days and 1 year with that of other patients undergoing retransplantation due to PNF in the Sao Paulo State during the same period.

Results

The majority of patients were females (60.87%), with a mean age of 44.6 years. The etiology that led to our first transplantation was cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus (HCV; n = 6), followed by acute liver failure, (n = 5). The average of ICU stay was 15.08 days (range, 5-45). The mean MELD score was 34.43 (range, 19-50). The survival was 73.92% and 60.78% at 30 days and 1 year postretransplantation, respectively, whereas for São Paulo State, it was 63.04% and 51.63%, respectively.     

MELD and prediction of post-liver transplantation survival.

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) was developed to predict short-term mortality in patients with cirrhosis. It has since become the standard tool to prioritize patients for liver transplantation. We assessed the value of pretransplant MELD in the prediction of posttransplant survival. We identified adult patients who underwent liver transplantation at our institution during 1991-2002. Among 2,009 recipients, 1,472 met the inclusion criteria. Based on pretransplant MELD scores, recipients were stratified as low risk (< or = 15), medium risk (16-25), and high risk (>25). The primary endpoints were patient and graft survival. Mean posttransplant follow-up was 5.5 years. One-, 5- and 10-year patient survival was 83%, 72%, and 58%, respectively, and graft survival was 76%, 65%, and 53%, respectively. In univariable analysis, patient and donor age, patient sex, MELD score, disease etiology, and retransplantation were associated with posttransplantation patient and graft survival. In multivariable analysis adjusted for year of transplantation, patient age >65 years, donor age >50 years, male sex, and retransplantation and pretransplant MELD scores >25 were associated with poor patient and graft survival. The impact of MELD score >25 was maximal during the first year posttransplant. In conclusion, older patient and donor age, male sex of recipient, retransplantation, and high pretransplant MELD score are associated with poor posttransplant outcome. Pretransplant MELD scores correlate inversely with posttransplant survival. However, better prognostic models are needed that would provide an overall assessment of transplant benefit relative to the severity of hepatic dysfunction.     

Adult Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: A 6-Year Single Center Experience

No long-term (>3 years) prospective comparison of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (A2ALLTx) to adult deceased donor liver transplantation (ADDLTx) has been reported. This is a prospective, IRB approved, 6-year comparison of A2ALLTx to ADDLTx. Data include: age, gender, ethnicity, primary liver disease, waiting time, pretransplant CTP/MELD score, cold ischemia time (CIT), perioperative mortality, acute and chronic rejection, graft and patient survival, charges and post-transplant complications. In 6 years, 202 ADDLTx (74.5%) and 69 A2ALLTx (25.5%) were performed at VCUHS. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) was the most common reason for transplantation in both groups (48.1% vs. 42%). Data regarding overall patient and graft survival, monetary charges and retransplantation rates were similar. Comparison of patient/graft survivals, retransplantation rates in patients with and without HCV were not statistically different. A2ALLTx patients had less acute rejection (11.5% vs. 23.9%) and more biliary complications (26.1% vs. 11.4%). Overall, A2ALLTx is as durable a liver replacement technique as the ADDLTx. Patients with A2ALLTx were younger, had lower MELD scores, less acute rejection and similar histological HCV recurrence. Biliary complications were more common in A2ALLTx but were not associated with increased graft loss compared to ADDLTx.     

Assessment of short-term survival after liver transplant by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has demonstrated the ability to predict mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list. The aim of this study was to assess the capability of the MELD score to correctly predict posttransplantation survival in Spain and to determine specific thresholds of MELD above which liver transplantation should be discouraged and the patient removed from the waiting list. METHODS: In this study, we retrospectively applied the MELD score to 168 patients at time of transplantation to estimate 1-month and 3-month posttransplant survivals by stratifying them into four groups: group A, MELD score < 10; group B, MELD score 10-18; group C, MELD score 19-24; group D, MELD score > 24. RESULTS: One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals were 84.3%, 80% and 79.5%, respectively. One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals in group A (18 patients) were identical (77.8%). In group B (80 patients), 1-month survival was 84.8%, and 2- and 3-month survivals were 78.4%. In group C (42 patients) 1-month survival was 90.5% and 2- and 3-month survivals were 88%. One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals in group D (28 patients) were 77.9%, 74%, and 70%, respectively. We defined a new group (group E) formed by patients with MELD score < or =24. When we compared 1-, 2-, and 3-month survival rates in group E (85.6%, 81.25%, and 81.25%, respectively) with survival rates in group D, the difference was not significant (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Although overall outcomes of patients whose MELD scores were high at the time of liver transplantation were inferior to those of patients whose MELD scores were lower, there was no significant difference for specific thresholds of MELD above which liver transplantation should be discouraged and the patient removed from the waiting list.     

Pediatric liver retransplantation: indications and outcome

INTRODUCTION: Liver transplantation is the only treatment for end-stage liver disease. Not all patients have a favorable outcome. Graft failure secondary to primary nonfunction, vascular complications, or chronic rejection among other problems may lead to retransplantation. Retransplantation represents 8% to 29% of liver transplantations in the pediatric population. The aim of this study was to present our experience with retransplanted children by analyzing the indications and the results. METHODS: All patients were prospectively included in our database, including 125 children. We included the indications for retransplantation, complications, and mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival analysis. RESULTS: Since 1994, 125 patients were transplanted and 25 were retransplanted (20%), including 5 who received a third graft. Primary nonfunction represented 30% of the indications for retransplantation and hepatic artery thrombosis, 20%. Six of 25 patients who received a first retransplantation and 2 of 5 who received a second retransplantation died. The most frequent cause of death was multiorgans failure. The survivals at 1 and 5 years were 82% and 76% for children receiving a first retransplantation, and 60% at 1 and 5 years for those who received a second retransplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Organ failure after liver transplantation was a common event in pediatric transplantation. Survival was similar between patients transplanted once and those who received one retransplantation. Survival decreased among patients who received a third graft but was maintained at 60%, which is better than most published results for first retransplanted patients. Retransplantation is a valid option with good results for selected pediatric cases.     

An outcome comparison between primary liver transplantation and retransplantation based on the pretransplant MELD score

Survival after liver retransplantation (RLTX) is worse than after primary liver transplantation (LTX). We studied retrospectively the 2-year outcome in 44 patients who received RLTX more than 30 days after the primary transplant and in 669 after LTX performed between December 1993 and October 1999, focusing on the relation between the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score immediately pretransplant and post-transplant survival. A 2-year survival for RLTX was inferior to LTX (65.9% vs. 82.9%, P < or = 0.01). This difference was greatest with MELD scores < 25; survival within 2 years remained 11.3-18.2% less for RLTX than for LTX (6 months, P = 0.002; 12 months, P = 0.029, 24 months, P = 0.123). Mortality was mainly related to early vascular complications and sepsis. Two-year survival after RLTX was 81.8% if RLTX occurred < 2 years after LTX and 50% if the interval between LTX and RLTX was > 2 years (P < 0.05). MELD scores were similar in 2-year survivors and nonsurvivors after late RLTX (P = 0.82). Late RLTX is marked by poor survival regardless of the pretransplant MELD score. The MELD-based allocation system may not benefit patients who undergo retransplantation.     

Prospective Validation of a New Priority Allocation Model for Liver Transplant Candidates: An Interim Analysis

Background

The system that controls the waiting list (WL) and organ allocation for liver transplantation (OLT) seeks to achieve 3 main goals: objectivity, low dropout risks and good post-OLT results. We sought to prospectively validate a priority allocation model that is believed to achieve objectivity without penalizing dropout risk and post-OLT results.

Methods

We evaluated a study group of 272 patients enrolled in 2006-2007. WL candidates were divided into 2 categories: cirrhotic patients classified according to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (MELD list and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) organized according to a specific score (non-MELD list). The allocation algorithm for donor-recipient match assigned an optimal graft to the first MELD candidate with a MELD score of ≥20; a suboptimal graft, to the first non-MELD patient. A respective control group of 327 patients transplanted from 2003-2006 was characterized by a unique WL with a free allocation policy. We performed an interim analysis of this prospectively controlled study.

Results

Although the study group showed a lower percentage of OLT (P < .05) than the control group (37% vs 45%), it selected patients for OLT based on a higher MELD score (P < .05), thus obtaining similar dropout, post-OLT survivals, and intention-to-treat (ITT) survival probabilities as the controls. Among MELD patients, we observed a significantly reduced dropout and better ITT survival profiles than those of the control group (P = .02), whereas the similar results were delivered among non-MELD patients (P > .05). Among patients with a MELD score of ≥20, the prevalences of suboptimal grafts (0% vs 48%) and of early graft losses (0% vs 21%) were lower in the study than in the control group (P < .05).

Conclusions

We prospectively validated a priority allocation model based on objective criteria that achieved high ITT survival rates.     

Outcome of imported liver allografts and impact on patient access to liver transplantation

Liver allografts declined by local transplant centers are then offered regionally or nationally as imported grafts. Most of these grafts are declined because of poor donor quality. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent liver transplantation between January 2004 and December 2005. There were 102 liver transplants in 98 recipients. They were divided into two groups: imported graft recipients (n = 37) and locally procured grafts recipients (n = 61). Eighty-six percent (32 of 37) of imported grafts were obtained from extended criteria donors defined as subjects treated with high doses of ionotropes with elevated liver enzymes, donor age over 70 years, macrosteatosis above 25%, positive hepatitis C or hepatitis B core antibody serology, systemic disease, history of cancer, hypernatremia, or with infection. The remaining grafts were declined due to unavailability of suitable recipients or social history. Recipient age and etiology of liver disease were similar for both groups. The mean MELD score was 22.1 +/- .9 among the imported graft recipients and 26.1 +/- 1 for the locally procured graft recipients (P < .01). There was no difference in blood loss or postoperative complications. Postoperative mean peak total bilirubin was similar in both groups. However, imported graft recipients had significantly higher mean peak AST (2436 +/- 282 vs 1380 +/- 165 U/L, P < .001) and ALT (1098 +/- 114 vs 803 +/- 87 U/L, P < .05). Primary graft nonfunction as well as 30 day and 1-year patient and graft survivals were similar for both groups. In conclusion, imported grafts can be transplanted in selected patients with outcomes comparable to locally procured grafts.     

Prognostic impact of model for end-stage liver disease score in patients undergoing liver transplantation with suboptimal livers

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze the prognostic impact of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in patients undergoing liver transplantation (OLT) with suboptimal livers. METHODS: Between January 2002 and January 2006, 160 adult patients with liver cirrhosis received a whole liver for primary OLT at our institution including 81 with a suboptimal liver (SOL group) versus 79 with an optimal liver (group OL). The definition of suboptimal liver was: one major criterion (age >60 years, steatosis >20%) or at least two minor criteria: sodium >155 mEq/L, Intensive Care Unit stay >7 days, dopamine >10 microg/kg/min, abnormal liver tests, and relevant hemodynamic instability. RESULTS: Baseline recipients characteristics were comparable in the two study groups. The SOL group had a significantly greater number of early graft deaths (<30 days) than the OL group, while the 3-year Kaplan-Meier patient survivals were similar. Using logistic regression, MELD score was significantly related to patient death only in the SOL group (P = .01), and the receiver operator characteristics curve method identified 17 as the best MELD cutoff with the 3-year survival of 93% versus 85% for MELD < or =7 versus >17, respectively (P > 05). In comparison, it was 94% and 72% in the SOL group (P < .05). Similarly, MELD >17 was significantly associated with early graft death rates only in the SOL group. CONCLUSION: This study advised surgeons to not use suboptimal livers for patients with advanced MELD scores, thus supporting a donor-recipient matching policy.     

Comparative study between living and cadaveric donors in pediatric liver transplantation

We examined whether the results in living-related hepatic transplantation (LRLT) are better than those from a cadaveric donor (CDLT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The last 27 consecutive LRLT, performed from 1998 to 2005, were compared with 27 CDLT matched for age, weight, date, and diagnosis. Grafts in LRLT group were left lateral segment (n = 22), left lobe (n = 3), and right lobe (n = 2). In the CDLT group, the grafts were split in situ (n = 10), hepatic reduction (n = 9) and whole liver (n = 8). We analyzed the actuarial survivals (grafts and children), retransplantation, primary nonfunction, initial graft malfunction (liver enzymes >2000 U/L), surgical complications, rejection, and resource consumption. RESULTS: Patient survivals at 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years were 100%, 96%, and 96% in LRLT and 100%, 100%, and 100% in CDLT (P = NS). Graft survivals were 93%, 89%, and 89% versus 96%, 96%, and 96%, respectively (P = NS). Complications were biliary complications (LRLT, 25% vs CDLT, 3%; P = .021); portal vein thrombosis (LRLT, 7% vs CDLT, 3%; NS), and hepatic artery thrombosis (LRLT, 0% vs CDLT, 3%; NS). The overall incidence of acute rejection was slightly higher (NS) in LRLT (LRLT, 18% vs CDLT, 11%; NS). Liver enzyme levels were higher in the CDLT group, but initial malfunction rate was not statistically different. Regarding resource consumption: blood product needs were higher in LRLT (P < .05) and hospital stay and ICU stay were longer, although not significantly, among LRLT. CONCLUSIONS: The results in LRLT among children are similar to those obtained in CDLT. We found a trend towards less initial graft malfunction in LRLT. Blood product needs were higher in LRLT. Hospital and ICU stay were longer, but not significantly different in LRLT. The benefits of LRLT are saving a scarce resource: a cadaveric donor liver graft.     

Cadaveric donor factor variations during a 12-year period: influence on kidney transplant outcomes

Our purpose was to evaluate changes in cadaveric donor factors between 1993 and 2004 and their impact on the short- and long-term outcomes of renal transplants in a single center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cadaveric renal transplants performed in our unit between 1993 and 2004 were divided in two groups of identical length: A (n = 455; 1993-1998) and B (n = 465; 1999-2004). Major differences related to donor, graft, and recipient factors were analyzed between groups and correlated with main outcome parameters. Recipient age, gender, weight, etiology of end-stage renal disease, average length of dialysis, and cold ischemia were not different in the two periods. RESULTS: Grafts harvested in our hospital were more frequent in group A (92.3 vs 78.2%; P < .005). Traumatic causes of death were more frequent before 1999: 90.9 vs 70.9% (P < .001). Mean donor age was higher after 1999: 31.37 vs 35.94 years (P < .005). Female donors were more frequent in the second period: 20.5 vs 26.6% (P < .05). Mean donor weight was also higher: 52.36 vs 67.86 kg (P < .05). All of these differences were unfavourable characteristics regarding graft outcomes. Delayed graft function (A = 13%, B = 24.2%), acute rejection episodes (A = 41.2%, B = 28%), and chronic allograft dysfunction (A = 23.5%, B = 14.4%) were also significantly different between the two cohorts (P < .005). Graft function (serum creatinine at 1 and 2 years), patient and graft survivals, causes of graft loss, and of patient death were similar across time. CONCLUSION: The unfavorable tendency in the quality of cadaveric donors during the last 12 years had no negative impact on graft function and patient outcome.     

Thirty years of cardiac transplantation at Stanford university

BACKGROUND: The experience with 30 years of cardiac transplantation at Stanford University Medical Center was reviewed. A total of 954 transplants were performed in 885 patients. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on immunosuppression received: group I, no cyclosporine (INN: ciclosporin) (n = 201) (January 1968-November 1980); group II, cyclosporine (n = 248) (December 1980-June 1987); and group III, cyclosporine + OKT3 (n = 436) (July 1987-March 1998). RESULTS:The 1-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial survivals were 68%, 41%, and 24% (group I); 80%, 57%, and 37% (group II); and 85%, 68%, and 46% (group III) (I vs II, P <.01; I vs III, P <.005; and II vs III, P <.005). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial death rates from rejection were 8%, 12%, and 14% (group I); 5%, 7%, and 7% (group II); and 2%, 5%, and 5% (group III) (I vs II, P = not significant; I vs III, P <.005; and II vs III, P <.005). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial death rates from infection were 25%, 43%, and 50% (group I); 8%, 17%, and 29% (group II); and 6%, 11%, and 16% (group III) (I vs II, P <.005; I vs III, P <.005; and II vs III, P <.05). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial death rates from graft coronary artery disease were 0%, 5%, and 13% (group I); 0%, 12%, and 19% (group II); and 1%, 6%, and 9% (group III) (I vs II, P <.01; I vs III, P <.005; and II vs III, P = not significant). There have been 69 retransplants in 67 patients with 1-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial survivals of 49%, 27%, and 15%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of 3 decades of experience with cardiac transplantation has resulted in improved overall survival. The incidence of rejection and of death from infection and graft coronary artery disease have decreased over time, primarily as a result of improvements in immunosuppression and in the prevention and treatment of infection. Continued advances in perioperative management and the development of more specific, less toxic immunosuppressive agents could further refine this initial experience and improve the survival and quality of life of patients after cardiac transplantation.     

Outcome of liver retransplantation in children.

Irreversible liver graft failure is a life-threatening complication. We reviewed the first 200 pediatric liver transplantations in Birmingham. Forty-one children developed primary graft failure, 9 of whom developed secondary graft failure. The main indications for graft failure were primary nonfunction (PRNF; 8 patients), vascular complications (VASC; 23 patients), and chronic rejection (CHRE; 19 patients). Thirty-two children underwent retransplantation (ReTx) (21 children received reduced grafts; 11 children, whole hepatic grafts). Patient survival was significantly worse for retransplant recipients compared with children receiving a single graft (63% v 76. 5% actuarial patient survival at 1 year; P <.05). Primary graft 1-year actuarial survival was 74% in first grafts compared with 47% for regrafts (P <.05), but improved with time. The graft 1-year survival rate was 55% for whole grafts and 45% for reduced and/or split grafts in the first 100 grafts compared with 83% and 66% in the second 100 grafts, respectively (P <.01). Emergency ReTx within a month of transplantation was associated with more complications and a worse outcome (1-year survival rate, 37%) compared with patients who underwent ReTx later (1-year survival rate, 72%; P <. 01). The incidence of primary graft failure decreased from 33% in the first 100 grafts to 16% in the second 100 grafts (P <.01), as did the incidence of PRNF, which decreased from 8% to 0% (P <.05). Although the rates of graft failure from VASC decreased from 15% to 8% (P =.2) and CHRE decreased from 11% to 8% (P =.6), neither reached statistical significance. The improved results overall are because of advances in surgical techniques, intensive care management, and graft preservation and refinements in immunosuppression. We conclude that ReTx for a child with primary graft failure is justified.     

Risk factors in liver retransplantation: a single-center experience

Liver retransplantation (Re-OLT) is one of the most debated issues in medicine over the past decade. Re-OLT, currently is accepted for patients with irreversible failure of a hepatic graft caused by primary nonfunction (PNF), hyperacute/chronic rejection, or hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT); whereas it is still controversial for patients with recurrent viral disease, in particular hepatitis C virus (HCV) cirrhosis. Patient and graft survival rates are lower than those observed after primary liver transplantation (OLT). The aim of the present study was to analyze the risk factors that adversely affect survival after Re-OLT in a single center. Medical data were collected for 23 patients who underwent Re-OLT from November 2002 to December 2008 including six men and seven women of mean age of 51.3 years. The most frequent indications for Re-OLT were: PNF (69.5%; 16/23), HCV recurrence (8.6%; 2/23), or HAT (8.6%; 2/23). Mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at Re-OLT was 27.7 (range = 9-40). After a mean follow-up of 37.4 ± 30 (standard deviation) months, 43% (10/23) of patients had died, including 70% within the first 2 months after Re-OLT. Sepsis represented the commonest cause of death (40%). Re-OLT was performed for PNF among 90% of succumbing patients. As regards dead patients, 4/10 were HCV⁺ whose causes of death were sepsis (n = 2), alcoholic cirrhosis (n = 2), and undetermined (n = 1). Comparing patients who died after liver Re-OLT versus alive patients, we did not find any significant difference in terms of mean MELD (28.6 vs 27; P = NS), MELD > 25 (60% vs 61.5%, P = NS), donor age > 60 years (30% vs 15.3%, P = NS), HCV⁺ (40% vs 62%, P = NS), or time interval from OLT to Re-OLT (12.2 vs 777.7 days, P = NS). Patient survivals after Re-OLT were 67% at 3 years and 50% at 5 years, which were lower than those of first transplantations, as reported by other European and International Centers. Forty percent of deaths after Re-OLT occurred among HCV⁺ recipients, but for reasons unrelated to HCV infection.     

Impact of pretransplant MELD score on posttransplant outcome in orthotopic liver transplantation for patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure

This study was performed to evaluate the usefulness of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score in comparison with the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score to predict short-term postoperative survival and 3-month morbidity among patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from all patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation in our unit from December 1999 to November 2005, on the admission day MELD and CTP scores were calculated for each patient according to the original formula. We evaluated the accuracy of MELD and CTP to predict postoperative short-term survival and 3-month morbidity using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis, respectively. RESULTS: Seven of 42 patients died within 3-months follow-up. The MELD scores for nonsurvivors (32.97 +/- 7.11) were significantly higher than those for survivors (24.90 +/- 4.96; P < .05), CTP scores were significantly higher, too (12.57 +/- 0.98, 11.51 +/- 1.17; P < .05). ROC analysis identified the MELD best cut-off point to be 25.67 to predict postoperative morbidity (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.841; sensitivity = 85.7%; specificity = 60.0%), and the CTP best cut-off point was 11.5 (AUC = 0.747; sensitivity = 85.7%; specificity = 54.3%). MELD score was superior to CTP score to predict postoperative short-term survival and 3-month morbidity among patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: MELD score was an objective predictive system and more efficient than CTP score to evaluate the risk of 3-month morbidity and short-term prognosis in patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation.     

Outcome after liver re-transplantation in patients with recurrent chronic hepatitis C

Long-term outcome after liver retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C has been reported to be inferior to other indications. The identification of factors associated which improved long-term results may help identify hepatitis C positive patients who benefit from liver retransplantation. Outcome after liver retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C was analyzed in 18 patients (group 1) and compared with hepatitis C positive patients undergoing liver retransplantation for initial nonfunction (group 2, n=11) and patients with liver retransplantation for other indications (group 3, n=169). Five-year patient survival following retransplantation for groups 1, 2 and 3 was 59% 84% and 60%. Increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and serum bilirubin, as well as white cell count and MELD score at day of retransplantation were associated with impaired patient outcome. Five-year survival after retransplantation in patients with recurrent hepatitis C is similar to that in patients undergoing liver retransplantation for other indications. Our analysis showed MELD score, bilirubin, ALT levels and white cell counts preorthotopic liver transplantation are important predictive factors for outcome. This observational study may help select patients and identify the optimal time-point of liver retransplantation in 'Hepatitis C' virus positive patients in the future.     

Impact of pretransplant MELD score on posttransplant outcome in living donor liver transplantation

It is not clear whether pretransplantation MELD (model for End-Stage Liver Disease) score can foresee posttransplant outcome. We retrospectively evaluated 80 adult patients (55 men, 25 women) who underwent living donor liver transplantation between September 1998 and March 2003. Five other patients with fulminant hepatitis were excluded. The UNOS-modified MELD scores were calculated to stratify patients into three groups: group 1) MELD score less than 15 (n = 13); group 2) MELD score 15 to 24 (n = 36); and group 3) MELD score 25 and higher (n = 26). The patients were predominantly men (n = 52, 69.3%) with overall mean age of 43.9 years (range, 17-62 years). The mean follow-up was 15.7 months (range, 1-47; median = 14 months). The mean MELD score was 22.7 (range, 9-50; median = 21). The overall 1- and 2-year patient survivals were 87% and 78.7%, respectively. The 1-year patient survivals for groups 1, 2, and 3 were 100%, 87%, and 79%; respectively. 2-year survivals, 100%, 79%, and 61%, respectively. Survivals stratified by MELD showed no statistically remarkable differences in 1-year and 2-year patient survival (P = .08). In contrast, 1-year and 2-year patient survival rates for UNOS status 2A, 2B, and 3 were 73%-50%, 95%-91%, and 91%-91%, statistically significant difference (P = .002). Finally, to date preoperative MELD score showed no significant impact on 1- and 2-year posttransplant outcomes in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation recipients, but we await longer-term follow-up with greater numbers of patients.     

Predictability and Survival in Liver Replantransplantation: Monocentric Experience

Liver retransplantation is the only treatment for patients with hepatic graft failure. Due to the shortage of organs, it is essential to optimize its use. Between 1998–2010, our center performed retransplantations on 48 (12.8%) patients (re-OLT). The data are compared with those for a group of 374 patients who did not receive retransplantations (NO re-OLT). The re-OLT vs NO re-OLT groups did not significantly differ in mean age of recipients (47 vs 51 years), indications for transplantation (hepatitis C virus cirrhosis 54% vs 56%, alcoholic cirrhosis 25% vs 17%, hepatocellular carcinoma 14% vs 22%), mean Model for End-stage Liver Disease (25 vs 20), mean total cold ischemia time (385 vs 379 minutes), or mean age of donors (52 vs 49 years). The main causes of retransplantation were primary graft nonfunction (64%), arterial thrombosis (8%), biliary complications (6%), and hepatitis C virus recurrence (4%). The difference in overall patient survival was not statistically significant. The patient's survival at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years for RE-OLT vs NO-reOLT was 56% vs 63%, 53% vs 60%, 46% vs 57%, and 44% vs 53%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≥23 as a predictor factor of retransplantation (P = .04). Other variables predicting outcome included age of donors (≥65 years vs younger group), age of recipients (≥50 years vs younger group), cold ischemia (≥600 vs <600 minutes), and transplantation indications (hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, alcohol, and others). The retransplantation performed between 8–15 days appeared to have worse results than those in other periods (0–7 days, 16–30 days, 1–6 months, >6 months). The incidence of re-OLT in the series (12.8%) was comparable to that in the literature, and primary graft nonfunction in the study represents the main cause of retransplantation. Our analysis showed that the indication of the first transplant and the age of the donor were not risk factors for re-OLT. Liver retransplantation is a concrete alternative lifesaver for patients with graft failure.     

Liver retransplantation in children in Poland

An average of 15% of patients require retransplantation due to irreversible liver graft failure due to primary graft nonfunction, chronic rejection, vascular and biliary complications, or infections. The survival of patients and grafts after retransplantation is inferior to that after primary transplantation. The purpose of the present study was to examine the incidence, indications, and outcome of retransplantation in children. In our center 169 liver transplantations had been performed in 154 patients, and 14 patients (9%) required 15 retransplantations: nine in the early postoperative period, five late after primary transplantation, and one late after the second transplantation. One-year patient survival after primary transplantation was 82%, but after early retransplantation it was 55%.