Association of lung perfusion disparity and mortality in patients with cystic fibrosis awaiting lung transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The risk of death for patients with end-stage cystic fibrosis awaiting lung transplantation remains high and most patients succumb to respiratory failure. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of ventilation-perfusion scintillation scans, obtained during the pre-transplant period, to identify patterns that predict prognosis while on the waiting list. These patterns were compared with other pulmonary physiologic markers of ventilation and perfusion obtained from pulmonary function and cardiopulmonary exercise tests. METHODS: From November 1990 to January 1999, 46 patients with cystic fibrosis were listed for bilateral lung transplantation. Fourteen (30.4%) died while waiting for a transplant (Group 1), whereas 32 were transplanted successfully or remain alive and waiting (Group 2). Mean arterial blood gas values, Brasfield radiograph scores, cardiopulmonary exercise data and the degree of scintillation scan abnormalities between lungs were compared for each group. RESULTS: Mean survival for Group 1 was 10.2 +/- 1.7 months, and for Group 2 was 23.5 +/- 3.0 months (p < 0.001). The right upper lung zone was the most severely affected segment. The Cox proportional hazards model revealed an increased perfusion disparity and resting hypercapnia as the main predictors of death while on the transplant list. The Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated greater survival for the groups with <30% disparity between lungs on the pre-transplant scintillation scans. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that severe, unilateral perfusion abnormalities seen on scintillation scans in patients with cystic fibrosis are associated with an increased risk of dying while on the lung transplant waiting list and may be helpful in identifying patients who should be considered for early or living-donor transplantation.     

Death on the Kidney Waiting List—Good Candidates or Not?

The waiting list for a kidney or simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant is growing, and waiting times are getting longer. As a consequence, transplant candidates are dying while waiting for a transplant. In a retrospective analysis, we studied whether patients on our list who died while waiting were good candidates. From January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2004, 85 candidates on our list died. Of these, 71% were waiting for a first transplant; 62% had a current panel-reactive antibody (PRA) level of 0%. Of the 85 candidates who died, the mean (+/-SD) age was 53 +/- 11 years; mean waiting time from listing to death, 979 +/- 749 days. The most common cause of death was cardiovascular disease. Many of those candidates who died while waiting were young, first-transplant candidates with a low PRA level. But only limited information was available; prospective studies are necessary to determine whether or not they were, in fact, good candidates.     

Outcome of infants listed for lung or heart/lung transplantation

BACKGROUND: Little is known about outcome, characteristics, or organ availability for infants listed for lung or heart/lung transplantation. METHODS: Within a 45-month period at one institution, all pediatric patients who were listed for primary lung or heart/lung transplantation and who reached the end point of either transplant or death prior to transplant were identified. Outcomes for those patients listed as younger than and older than 1 year of age were compared. RESULTS: Among 48 pediatric patients, 19 were infants less than one year of age. The median age among infants at listing was 3.7 months (range 0.5 to 8.9 months). Death before transplant occurred in 10 of 19 infants (53%) compared with 14 of 29 (48%) children. When comparing those infants who died prior to transplant with those who received organs, there were no significant differences with respect to size, blood type, age at listing, presence of pulmonary hypertension, or type of transplant for which the patient was listed. There was a trend toward poorer pre-transplant survival for infants when compared with children. Waiting times were significantly shorter for infants vs children (p = 0.02). The incidence of acute cellular rejection and serious infection was similar in the 2 groups. Infants had significantly longer hospitalization post-transplant and a trend toward poorer hospital survival, although survival at 1 year was comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: The outcome for infants listed for lung or heart/lung transplantation is similar to that of children; thus, very young age should not be considered a contraindication to lung or heart/lung transplantation. Earlier diagnosis and listing may decrease pre-transplant mortality.     

Pre-transplant treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: assessment of tumor necrosis in explanted livers

Although liver transplantation (LT) is likely the most effective therapy for localized hepatocellular cancer (HCC), limited donor livers have resulted in prolonged waiting times for transplant. Pre-transplant therapy such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) may be needed to sustain patients who are waiting. Records, imaging studies, and pathology to identify tumor necrosis on 15 explanted livers with HCC were reviewed. Forty-nine nodules were removed from 15 explanted livers. Five nodules in three livers that received no pre-transplant therapy were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 44 nodules in 12 patients, 29 (66%) had 75% or more tumor necrosis. Fifteen nodules in five patients had <75% necrosis and these were due to local/non-local recurrences or perhaps suboptimal treatment with RFA, TACE or cisplatin gel injection. Mean waiting time for LT was 162.5 d. Nine of 13 patients had a different number of nodules when listed as were seen at explant, although stage changed in only three patients. One patient died 48 months post-LT (recurrent HCC), while the remaining patients are alive 2-55 months post-LT. We conclude that pre-transplant treatments for HCC are generally effective in achieving tumor necrosis. Factors involved in eventual extent of HCC seen at LT may include adequacy of treatment, accuracy of imaging techniques, local/non-local recurrences, and time waiting for transplant. We now need to determine if tumor necrosis can allow patients to wait longer for transplant and eventually affect long-term outcome.     

Do patients with acute liver failure have a better chance to receive liver grafting?

OBJECTIVE: Patients with acute hepatic failure (AHF) were always given first priority on the transplant waiting list. We investigated whether AHF patients will deprive other patients on the waiting list of the chance of liver transplantation (LTx). METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 1999 to March 2003, a total of 423 patients were on the transplant waiting list at the National Taiwan University Hospital. Sixty-five of the patients had AHF caused by hepatitis-B-related disease (HBV, n = 52, 80%), Wilson disease (n = 3, 4.6%), drug-induced AHF (n = 3, 4.6%), and other causes (n = 7, 10.8%).Thirty-three patients died and 16 survived by medical treatment. Two received LTx abroad and 14 underwent LTx at our hospital (7 living-related; 7 cadaver). A total of 140 patients died while waiting for a transplant during the period studied. Of them, 107 were among 358 non-AHF patients (30%), and time-to-death interval was 133 +/- 175 days (median: 62); 33 were among 65 AHF patients (51%); time to death was 19 +/- 28 days (median: 8). There were 35 cadaver donor livers available during the period; 28 of 358 non-AHF patients (7.8%), and 7 of 65 AHF patients (10.7%) received cadaveric LTx. Their waiting time totaled 342 +/- 316 and 12 +/- 9 days, respectively (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Most AHF patients died unless they received liver grafts. Even with a higher priority assigned to them, AHF patients still have little chance to get a cadaver donor liver in Taiwan, and non-AHF patients have an even slimmer chance. Therefore, we need to encourage liver donation from living-related donors.     

Mechanical limitation of pulmonary blood flow facilitates heart transplantation in older infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Progression of pulmonary vascular disease limits heart transplantation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) to early infancy. Our objective was to assess the impact of bilateral pulmonary artery banding (PAB) on the operative courses of HLHS infants transplanted at ages older than 4 months. METHODS: Courses of all HLHS patients in our center who remained listed to age >or=120 days before heart transplantation were assessed. Patients undergoing transplantation after standard management (control group) were compared to patients having a prior pulmonary blood flow limiting procedure (PAB group). RESULTS: Of 16 identified patients, one crossed over to stage I Norwood on day 185 and died post-operatively. Fifteen patients were transplanted at age >or=120 days (control group n=9, PAB group n=6). Four PAB patients had open PA band placement. Two PAB patients underwent experimental percutaneous bilateral internal pulmonary artery flow limiting device insertion. The PAB group mean age at banding was 141+/-54 days, and mean interval from PAB to transplant was 35+/-31 days (range 1.5-68 days). No differences in age at transplant, weight at transplant, warm graft ischemia time or total graft ischemia time were detected between groups. Mean times of mechanical ventilation (control 143+/-69h vs. PAB 44+/-13h), inhaled nitric oxide (control 126+/-70h vs. PAB 37+/-9h), inotropic support (control 171+/-64h vs. PAB 87+/-17h), intensive care unit (ICU) stay (control 8.3+/-2.7 days vs. PAB 4.5+/-1.4 days), and hospital stay (control 10.4+/-3.9 days vs. PAB 7.0+/-1.1 days) were all lower in the PAB group (P<0.05 all comparisons). Two control patients died, three required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and six did not tolerate primary chest closure. No PAB patient died or required ECMO. All PAB patients tolerated primary chest closure. All PAB patients had widely patent branch pulmonary arteries with no re-interventions to date. All hospital survivors remain alive (mean follow-up, control 50.2 months, PAB 11.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-transplant mechanical limitation of pulmonary blood flow simplified management and reduced morbidity for HLHS patients undergoing heart transplantation at ages >or=4 months. This strategy extends the permissible transplant waiting time in older infants with HLHS.     

Impact of optimal heart failure medical therapy on heart transplant listing

The data assessing the prognostic value of peak exercise oxygen consumption (VO2) in heart failure (HF) patients is largely derived from cross-sectional studies in which medical therapy was not maximized in all eligible patients and no clear explanation was given as to why such was the case. To assess the relative prognostic value of peak VO2 with respect to baseline medical therapy and its potential impact on transplant listing, 1-year event-free (death or left ventricular assist device placement) survival was compared among 341 HF patients, stratified in three groups based on peak VO2 (<10, 10 to 14, and >14 mL/min/kg). Similar analysis was performed on a subset of 288 patients who were on optimal medical therapy within this group. Average age of the study population was 55+/-11 years, ejection fraction was 23%+/-08%, and peak VO2 was 12.4+/-3.6 mL/min/kg. One-year event-free survival for the overall cohort was: peak VO2<10 (n=87), 63.2%; 10 to 14 (n=141), 81.1%; and >14 mL/min/kg (n=113), 90.2%. Patients with the same groups who were on optimal therapy had an event-free 1-year survival as follows: <10 (n=69), 72.4%; VO2 10 to 14 (n=127), 91.5%; and >14 mL/min/kg (n=92), 94.6%. In conclusion, cross-sectional assessment of HF prognosis may be misleading. In the intermediate risk group, this can significantly impact on medical decisions (eg, transplant listing). Optimization of therapy and long-term follow-up by a specialist may impact transplant listing.     

Survival of patients removed from the heart transplant waiting list

OBJECTIVE: End-stage heart failure has been associated with high mortality in the absence of transplantation. We evaluated the outcome of patients receiving optimal medical therapy who were removed from the cardiac transplant waiting list to determine survival and predictors of mortality. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 27 patients removed from the cardiac transplant waiting list from 1999 to 2001 at our institution. RESULTS: Mean age was 53 +/- 11 years; 16 of the patients were male. Status was IB in 3 cases and II in 24. Median time on the list was 32 months, and median follow-up was 2.9 years. Patients were removed from the transplant list because of either clinical improvement (group A, n = 18) or deterioration (group B, n = 9). In group A, 13 patients had improved functional status and 10 were in New York Heart Association class 1 or 2; 16 had improved echocardiographic left ventricular function. Survivals at 3 years were 100% in group A and 44% in group B (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Patients with end-stage heart failure who have clinical response to medical therapy have excellent 3-year survival. These data suggest the necessity of close evaluation of patients waiting for transplantation, with a low threshold for inactivation if persistent clinical improvement is observed.     

Morbidity and mortality of UNOS status 1B cardiac transplant candidates at home.

BACKGROUND: On January 20, 1999, UNOS listing regulations changed, allowing stable patients on inotropic support (Status IB) to be discharged home until cardiac transplant. The outcome, morbidity and cost savings of this new strategy has not been evaluated. METHODS: From 1/20/99 through 1/1/01, 155 patients were classified as UNOS Status 1B at our institution; 64 patients were never discharged and 91 were discharged home. Criteria for discharge were hemodynamic stability on low-dose, single-agent parenteral inotropic infusion, defined as dobutamine at a dose <7.5 microg/kg/min or milrinone <0.5 microg/kg/min. Data on re-admissions were collected prospectively. The frequency of complex ventricular arrhythmias was evaluated in a sub-group discharged with external or internal cardiodefibrillators (n = 38). RESULTS: Total Status I time to transplant for the 91 discharged patients was 139 +/- 91 days, with 87 +/- 67 days spent at home. Inpatient time to transplant was still high, with a mean of 51 +/- 45 days. The in-hospital time was comparable to that of the 64 patients who were never discharged (51 +/- 41 days). Fifty-nine percent of discharged patients were re-admitted, with 37% of patients requiring more than 1 admission. Sixty-six percent of admissions were for worsening heart failure (CHF), and 34% for infection or occlusion of the indwelling intravenous line. No significant arrhythmic events were recorded in the 38 patients who had internal or external cardiodefibrillators. Two patients died suddenly at home. One patient had declined to wear the external cardiodefibrillator. The other patient was not wearing the defibrillator at the time of the event, and in 634 hours of previous monitoring he had had no events. CONCLUSIONS: In UNOS Status 1B patients awaiting cardiac transplant on home inotropic therapy, mortality remains low but the re-admission rate was high. There appeared to be a low incidence of complex ventricular arrhythmias.     

Is bridging to transplantation with a left ventricular assist device a risk factor for transplant coronary artery disease?

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support is associated with coagulopathy, bleeding, increased blood transfusion, and increased anti-HLA antibody production. Increased anti-HLA antibody production is associated with early transplant rejection, transplant coronary artery disease (CAD), and decreased post-transplant survival rates. We asked whether bridging to transplantation with an LVAD increases the risk of transplant CAD. METHODS: We reviewed data for all adults (>18 years old) who underwent heart transplantation at our institution between 1988 and 2000. After exclusion of transplant recipients who survived <3 years, we divided the remaining cohort into 2 groups: those bridged to transplantation with LVADs (mean duration of support, 149 +/- 107 days, n = 29) and those in United Network for Organ Sharing Status 1 bridged to transplantation without LVADs (controls, n = 86). We compared groups in terms of disease cause, age, sex, donor age, panel-reactive antibody testing, crossmatching, pre- and post-transplant cholesterol concentrations, diagnosis of diabetes mellitus or treated hypertension, infections, calcium channel blocker use, transplant rejection, ischemic time, cytomegalovirus infection, pre-transplant transfusion, and incidence of transplant CAD (defined as any coronary lesion identified by coronary angiography). We considered p < 0.05 to be significant. RESULTS: The bridged and control groups were similar in all respects except mean ischemic time (217 +/- 58 minutes vs 179 +/- 67 minutes, p = 0.007), post-transplant cholesterol concentration (212 +/- 55 mg/dl vs 171 +/- 66 mg/dl, p = 0.007), and pre-transplant transfusion incidence (100% vs 22%, p < 0.001). The incidence of transplant CAD was similar in both groups during a 3-year follow-up period (28% vs 17%, p = 0.238) and during total follow-up (34% vs 35%, p = 0.969). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified cholesterol concentration at 1 year after transplantation as a significant predictor of CAD at 3 years after heart transplantation (p = 0.0029, odds ratio = 0.984). CONCLUSIONS: Bridging to transplantation with an LVAD does not increase the risk of transplant CAD. Nevertheless, aggressive prophylactic therapy to minimize potential risk factors for transplant CAD, such as increased cholesterol concentration, is warranted in all transplant recipients.     

Analysis of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in a liver transplantation waiting list

BACKGROUND: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) was introduced in 1999 to quantify the 3-month prognosis of cirrhotic patients after a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Because of the imbalance between organ donors and patients on the waiting list, the MELD was adopted by the United States in 2002 to allocate liver grafts for transplantation. Preliminary results have indicated a reduction in waiting list deaths and an increase in transplantation rates for candidates. Seeking to find a new model to predict death on the waiting list and after liver transplantation, retrospective studies have examined MELD scores in waiting list patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the MELD scores of patients on the liver waiting list for comparisons between transplanted patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed analyzing 131 registrations of 127 orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) patients (4 underwent retransplantation) grafted between November 2000 and January 2006, excluding 24 patients: 2 had urgent retransplantations due to hepatic artery thrombosis and 22 had incomplete data. These patients were divided into 3 groups: group I (transplanted patients)-53 patients underwent 55 OLT; group II-29 patients who died on the waiting list; group III-patients on the waiting list including 23 patients still waiting as of the date of the study. RESULTS: The main indication for OLT was hepatitis C virus cirrhosis (50.50%), followed by alcoholic liver cirrhosis (23.30%), cryptogenic cirrhosis (12.60%), autoimmune hepatitis (5.80%), hepatitis B virus cirrhosis (4.85%), and primary biliary cirrhosis (2.91%). Group I: MELD score 15.62 (range, 6-39) on admission to the list, and 18.87 (range, 7-39) at transplantation. The mean waiting time for OLT was 478.39 days (range, 2-1270 days). The 38 patients who survived underwent 39 OLT (1 retransplantation). The MELD score at entrance to the list was 14.62 (range, 7-30) and at transplantation, 17.70 (range, 7-39). The mean time between admission to the list and transplantation was 505.37 days (range, 6-1270 days). The 15 patients who died had received 16 OLT (1 retransplantation). Their MELD scores were 17.80 (range, 6-39) and 21.81 (range, 9-39) at admission to the list and at transplantation, respectively, with a mean time on the waiting list of 417.93 days (range, 2-872 days). Group II: 29 patients died before OLT, at a mean age of 52.60 years (range, 22-67 years). Their MELD score was 19.24 (range, 7-45), and the interval between admission to the waiting list and death was 249.55 days (range, 3-1247 days). Group III: 23 patients still active on the OLT waiting list at the time of study displayed a mean MELD score of 13.65 (range, 6-28) and 354.30 days (range, 2-905 days) waiting until the moment. In conclusion, MELD score at the time of admission to the waiting list was higher among those patients who died either awaiting a liver graft (19.24) or after OLT (17.80) compared with those who survived after OLT (14.60) or are still awaiting OLT (13.65).     

Reduced Mortality with Right-Lobe Living Donor Compared to Deceased-Donor Liver Transplantation When Analyzed from the Time of Listing

Right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) is not yet a fully accepted therapy for patients with end-stage liver failure in the Western hemisphere because of concerns about donor safety and inferior recipient outcomes. An outcome analysis from the time of listing for all adult patients who were listed for liver transplantation (LT) at our center was performed. From 2000 to 2006, 1091 patients were listed for LT. One hundred fifty-four patients (LRD; 14%) had suitable live donors and 153 (99%) underwent RLDLT. Of the remaining patients (DD/Waiting List; n = 937), 350 underwent deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT); 312 died or dropped off the waiting list; and 275 were still waiting at the time of this analysis. The LRD group had shorter mean waiting times (6.0 months vs. 9.8 months; p < 0.001). Although medical model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were similar at the time of listing, MELD scores at LT were significantly higher in the DD/Waiting List group (15.4 vs. 19.5; p = 0.002). Patients in Group 1 had a survival advantage with RLDLT from the time of listing (1-year survival 90% vs. 80%; p < 0.001). To our knowledge, this is the first report to document a survival advantage at time of listing for RLDLT over DDLT.     

Early experience with reduced-size liver transplants

Scarcity of small donors results in a high mortality rate for children on liver transplant waiting lists. To alleviate this problem, we have recently started to reduce the size of livers from older donors to use in children. In the last year, a total of 20 liver transplants were performed in 17 patients, including seven reduced-size liver transplants (RSLT) in six children. Mortality on the waiting list has been reduced to negligible amounts compared with a mortality rate of 25% before starting RSLT in patients with acute liver failure or those whose weight was less than 10 kg. Children undergoing RSLT weighed 10.8 +/- 8.5 kg compared with 20.9 +/- 20.3 for all others (NS). Cold ischemia time was significantly longer in the RSLT group (9.5 +/- 3.0 v 6.0 +/- 2.8 hours, P less than .05) as was intraoperative blood loss (9.4 +/- 9.4 v 3.0 +/- 3.5 blood volumes). There was no significant difference in postoperative aspartate aminotransferase and prothrombin time between the two groups. Four children received a RSLT as a primary procedure and three have survived with good liver function. Two patients were retransplanted with RSLT after a failed first transplant and both died of nonhepatic complications. This compares with 11 of 13 survivors in the whole liver transplant group. Causes of death in children who died after RSLT include cytomegalovirus sepsis (2) and myocardial infarction(1).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Mortality while awaiting liver retransplantation: predictability of MELD scores

INTRODUCTION: Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores at the time of listing on the transplant waiting list have been shown to accurately predict 3-month mortality in adults. There is no data assessing the accuracy of the MELD scores in predicting mortality of patients awaiting liver retransplantation. We sought to determine the outcome of patients listed for retransplantation at a single center and the accuracy of MELD scores in predicting mortality on the transplant waiting list. METHODS: A retrospective review of adult patients at a single center listed for a second liver transplantation during the years 1993 to 2000. MELD scores and a concordance statistic were calculated at the time of initial listing and initial transplant as well as the time of relisting for a second transplant and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 weeks after relisting. RESULTS: Of the 63 patients in the study, 43 (68%) received a second transplant, and 20 (32%) died while awaiting retransplantation. Of the patients receiving a second transplant, 13 (30%) died within 1 year of receiving the transplant. The most common cause of death on the waiting list was sepsis (50%), hepatorenal syndrome (20%), and multiorgan failure (10%), whereas the majority of deaths posttransplantation were sepsis-related (69%). At the time of relisting the c-statistic for MELD scores predicting death after 1 week on the waiting list was 0.78 (P = .007). After 3 months on the waiting list, the c-stat was largely unchanged (0.76, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that MELD scores may predict mortality on the transplant waiting list for patients listed for a second transplant.     

Dynamic changes in MELD score not only predict survival on the waiting list but also overall survival after liver transplantation

The predictive value of MELD score for post‐transplant survival has been under constant debate since its implementation in 2001. Aim of this study was to assess the impact of alterations in MELD score throughout waiting time (WT) on post‐transplant survival. A single‐centre retrospective analysis of 1125 consecutive patients listed for liver transplantation between 1997 and 2009 was performed. The impact of MELD score and dynamic changes in MELD score (DeltaMELD), as well as age, sex, year of listing and WT were evaluated on waiting list mortality and post‐transplant survival. In this cohort, 539 (60%) patients were transplanted, 223 (25%) died on list and 142 (15%) were removed from the waiting list during WT. One‐, three‐ and five‐year survival after liver transplantation were 83%, 78% and 76% respectively. DeltaMELD as a continuous variable proved to be the only significant risk factor for overall survival after liver transplantation (hazard ratio (HR): 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–1.1, P = 0.013). The highest risk of post‐transplant death could be defined for patients with a DeltaMELD > 10 (HR: 4.87, 95% CI 2.09–11.35, P < 0.0001). In addition, DeltaMELD as well as MELD at listing showed a significant impact on waiting list mortality. DeltaMELD may provide an easy evaluation tool to identify patients on the liver transplant waiting list with a high mortality risk after transplantation in the current setting. Temporarily withholding and re‐evaluating these patients might improve overall outcome after liver transplantation.     

Algorithm for prioritization of patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation

Prioritization of patients on the waiting list (WL) for OLT is still a critical issue. Numerous models have been developed to predict mortality before and after OLT. AIM: The aim of the study was to prospectively evaluate cirrhotics with and without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) severity of liver disease on the WL and at transplant, mortality on the WL and after OLT, and their correlations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An algorithm based on seven patient variables (MELD, CTP, UNOS, HCC, BMI, waiting time, age) was created by software dedicated to prioritize patients on the waiting list. RESULTS: We evaluated 118 patients including 75 men and 43 women of age range 19 to 66 years, who underwent OLT from July 2004 to June 2006. Mean CTP and MELD at listing were 8.44 (range 6-12) and 13 (range 2-24), respectively. Overall mortality on the WL at 24 months was 13%, which was significantly higher among patients with MELD > 25 compared to patients with MELD 0 to 15 (P < .0001) or MELD 16 to 25 (P = .0007) at listing. Mean MELD at OLT was 15 (range 7-36), which was significantly lower in patients with than without HCC (MELD 12 vs 16; P = .0003). Six hundred-day patient survival was significantly lower among patients with MELD > 25 compared to patients with MELD < 25 at OLT (P = .017), whereas no difference in survival was observed between patients with and without HCC. CONCLUSIONS: The sickest patients are characterized by high mortality both on the waiting list and after liver transplantation. Patients with HCC are transplanted in better condition compared to patients without HCC with the same survival.     

Combined orthotopic heart and liver transplantation: the need for exception status listing.

Through May 2004, 33 combined orthotopic heart-liver transplants (OHT/OLT) have been performed nationwide. No published data exist to date regarding outcomes of patients awaiting such transplants, although progression of two organ disease processes may contribute to premature death for waiting patients. Retrospective data were collected on patients listed for combined OHT/OLT from both an individual tertiary care transplant center and the national UNOS registry to delineate listing criteria and evaluate patient outcomes in both the pre- and post-MELD eras. All patients who survived to transplantation or died on the waiting list were included in the analysis. Results show that 29.6% of patients registered nationally and 42% of patients listed institutionally survived to transplantation. Survival to transplantation was associated with less severe liver disease, though patients with MELD scores ranging from 19 to 26 had significantly higher wait list mortality than expected when compared to single-organ liver transplants. Following combined orthotopic heart-liver transplantation, 80% and 70% of patients survive 1 and 3 years, respectively. In conclusion, combined OHT/OLT is a successful therapy, but current organ allocation policies may not ensure expeditious transplantation in critically ill patients with dual vital organ failure. Providing exception status listing to these patients would ensure more expeditious transplantation and potentially contribute to improved survival.     

The efficacy of hepatoportoenterostomy in biliary atresia

This report describes the treatment and outcome of 66 infants with biliary atresia. Mean age was 79.8 +/- 33.2 days. Diagnosis was achieved by 99mTc DISIDA scanning. Hepatoportoenterostomy (HPE) was performed in 48 cases and hepatoportocholecystostomy in four, with microscopic ducts at the porta hepatis. Fourteen infants without microscopic ducts did not undergo HPE. Patients were staged according to the postoperative result. HPE was successful in 25% of patients (group A), resulted in improvement in 19% (group B), failed in 43% (group C), and was short-term in 13% (group D). In patients less than 90 days of age, the HPE success rate was 31%; 23% improved, and 33% showed no improvement. Age (less than 90 days) and bile clearance were prognostic determinants of success. Reoperation was useful only in patients with a previously successful HPE. Ten of 20 patients referred for liver transplantation survived (50%) (7/11) survived after liver transplantation and 3/9 on the waiting list). Fourteen of 15 patients in group A remain anicteric and well without liver transplantation. Patients in group B have had extended survival (greater than 3 years) but eventually required transplantation. Patients in group C and children more than 90 days old at diagnosis require early liver transplantation. HPE is a useful procedure when performed in infants less than 90 days of age who have biliary atresia.     

Hospitalized valvular heart disease in patients on renal transplant waiting list: incidence,clinical correlates and outcomes

BACKGROUND: Patients with ESRD are at increased risk for heart valve calcification. It has not been established whether hospitalized valvular heart disease (VHD) is a substantial barrier to renal transplantation (RT) after transplant listing, or whether VHD progresses after RT. METHODS: Using data from the USRDS, we studied 35,215 patients with ESRD enrolled on the renal transplant waiting list from July 1994 to June 1997. Cox non-proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate adjusted, time-dependent hazard ratios (HR) for RT and VHD. RESULTS: In comparison to maintenance dialysis (2.2/1,000 person years), RT was independently associated with a lower hazard for hospitalization for VHD (0.7/1,000 person years, HR 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.17 - 0.47). Renal transplant recipients had much lower rates of VHD after transplant than before (rate ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% Cl 0.47 - 0.52). Patients with VHD were significantly less likely to receive RT (adjusted rate for RT 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 - 0.45) but patients who received valve replacement surgeries (VRS) were not affected (adjusted rate for RT 1.10, 95% CI 0.52 - 2.32, not significant). CONCLUSIONS: VHD is an uncommon but serious barrier to RT after listing, while VRS is not a significant barrier to RT. Established VHD does not appear to worsen after RT. Clinicians should consider giving increased attention to the detection and treatment of VHD during the pre-transplant evaluation.     

Longer-term risks associated with 10-year survival after heart transplantation in the cyclosporine era.

BACKGROUND: Long-term survival after heart transplantation is common in the cyclosporine era. However, there are few data documenting pre-transplant/peri-operative factors predictive of truly long-term survival (>10 years). The purpose of this study is to identify factors associated with 10-year survival after heart transplantation. METHODS: Our study population included 197 adults who survived >6 months and died <10 years after heart transplant (medium-term group) and 140 adults who survived >10 years after heart transplant (long-term group) between December 1980 and May 2001. A comparison was done between the two groups and we used multivariate analysis to identify which factors predicted 10-year survival. RESULTS: The long-term group had younger recipient and donor age, lower recipient body mass index at transplant, shorter waiting time and lower percentages of ischemic etiology/male recipient/non-white recipient. Kaplan-Meier plots of freedom from graft coronary artery disease and malignancy showed later onset patterns in the long-term group compared with the medium-term group. Multivariate analysis showed that white recipient, younger recipient and lower recipient body mass index at heart transplant were factors significantly associated with 10-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: Several pre-transplant/peri-operative factors were associated with survival beyond 10 years after heart transplantation. Stratified/tailored strategies based on these factors may be helpful to attain longer-term survival of recipients with higher risks.