Hepatitis C recurrence and fibrosis progression are not increased after living donor liver transplantation: a single-center study of 289 patients.

Today, hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause for liver transplantation (LT) and viral recurrence is almost universal. It has been suggested that viral replication within the transplanted tissue might be increased in organs of reduced size such as LD grafts. In the current literature the data is controversial, with many studies lacking routine liver biopsies. We performed a retrospective analysis of 289 HCV-LT (20 LD splits) patients receiving transplants between 1997 and 2005. Patient and organ survival, intensity of HCV recurrence, and fibrosis progression were analyzed with respect to deceased donor (DD) LT (DDLT) or living donor (LD) LT (LDLT). Organ and patient survival was significantly better for full-size recipients than for split-liver patients, with P = 0.037 for organ survival and P = 0.037 for patient survival; yet there were no significant differences when split-liver patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond the Milan criteria (n = 3) were excluded from the analysis (P > 0.05). First year fibrosis progression was 1.29 in full-size grafts and 1.07 in split-livers (P = not significant). In conclusion, in our patient sample, intensity of HCV recurrence was not increased in LD graft recipients compared to full-size recipients. Patient and organ survival were similar when patients with large HCC and early tumor recurrence were excluded from analysis. LDLT can therefore be advocated for HCV patients.     

Living-Related Versus Deceased Donor Pediatric Liver Transplantation: A Multivariate Analysis of Technical and Immunological Complications in 235 Recipients

Timely access to a living donor (LD) reduced pretransplant mortality in pediatric liver transplantation (LT). We hypothesized that this strategy may provide better posttransplant outcome. Between July 1993 and April 2002, 235 children received a primary LT from a LD (n = 100) or a deceased donor (DD) (n = 135). Demographic, surgical and immunological variables were compared, and respective impact on posttransplant complications was studied using a multivariate analysis. Five-year patient survival rates were 92% and 85% for groups LD and DD, respectively (p = 0.181), the corresponding graft survival rates being 89% and 77% (p = 0.033). At multivariate analysis: (1) type of donor (DD) was correlated with higher rate of artery thrombosis (p < 0.012); (2) biliary complication rate at 5 years was 29% and 23% for groups LD and DD, respectively (p = 0.451); (3) lower acute rejection incidence could be correlated with type of donor (DD) (p = 0.001), and immunosuppressive therapy (tacrolimus) (p < 0.001). We conclude that (1) according to the multivariate analysis, LT with LD provided similar patient and graft outcome, when compared to DD; (2) a higher rate of artery thrombosis and a lower rate of rejection were observed in group DD; (3) this study confirms the efficacy of tacrolimus for immunoprophylaxis, whatever the type of organ donor is.     

Outcomes of liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus coinfection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a controversial indication for liver transplantation (LT) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients because of reportedly poor outcomes. This prospective, multicenter US cohort study compared patient and graft survival for 89 HCV/HIV-coinfected patients and 2 control groups: 235 HCV-monoinfected LT controls and all US transplant recipients who were 65 years old or older. The 3-year patient and graft survival rates were 60% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 47%-71%] and 53% (95% CI = 40%-64%) for the HCV/HIV patients and 79% (95% CI = 72%-84%) and 74% (95% CI = 66%-79%) for the HCV-infected recipients (P < 0.001 for both), and HIV infection was the only factor significantly associated with reduced patient and graft survival. Among the HCV/HIV patients, older donor age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.3 per decade], combined kidney-liver transplantation (HR = 3.8), an anti-HCV-positive donor (HR = 2.5), and a body mass index < 21 kg/m(2) (HR = 3.2) were independent predictors of graft loss. For the patients without the last 3 factors, the patient and graft survival rates were similar to those for US LT recipients. The 3-year incidence of treated acute rejection was 1.6-fold higher for the HCV/HIV patients versus the HCV patients (39% versus 24%, log rank P = 0.02), but the cumulative rates of severe HCV disease at 3 years were not significantly different (29% versus 23%, P = 0.21). In conclusion, patient and graft survival rates are lower for HCV/HIV-coinfected LT patients versus HCV-monoinfected LT patients. Importantly, the rates of treated acute rejection (but not the rates of HCV disease severity) are significantly higher for HCV/HIV-coinfected recipients versus HCV-infected recipients. Our results indicate that HCV per se is not a contraindication to LT in HIV patients, but recipient and donor selection and the management of acute rejection strongly influence outcomes.     

Living Donor and Split‐Liver Transplants in Hepatitis C Recipients: Does Liver Regeneration Increase the Risk for Recurrence?

Concern exists that partial liver transplants (either a living donor [LD] or deceased donor [DD] in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients may be associated with an increased risk for recurrence. From 1999 to 2003, at our institution, 51 HCV-positive recipients underwent liver transplants: 32 whole-liver (WL) transplants, 12 LD transplants and 7 DD split transplants. Donor characteristics differed in that WL donors were older, and LD livers had lower ischemic times. Recipient characteristics were similar except that mean MELD scores in LD recipients were lower (p < 0.05). With a mean follow-up of 28.3 months, 46 (90%) recipients are alive: three died from HCV recurrent liver disease and two from tumor recurrence. Based on 1-year protocol biopsies, the incidence of histologic recurrence in the three groups is as follows: WL, 81%; LD, 50% and DD split, 86% (p = 0.06 for LD versus WL). The mean grade of inflammation on the biopsy specimens was: WL, 1.31; LD, 0.33 and DD split, 1.2 (p = 0.002 for LD versus WL; p = 0.03 for LD versus DD split). Mean stage of fibrosis was: WL, 0.96; LD, 0.22 and DD split, 0.60 (p = 0.07 for LD versus WL). Liver regeneration does not seem to affect hepatitis C recurrence as much, perhaps, as factors such as DD status, donor age and cold ischemic time.     

Living or deceased donor kidney transplants for candidates with significant extrarenal morbidity

BACKGROUND: Individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) must weigh the benefits and risks of dialysis vs. a transplant. However, if the patient has extrarenal morbidity, survival may be limited. We have recommended that, when possible, recipients have a living donor (LD) transplant. However, it could be argued that for recipients with extrarenal morbidity, the potential benefit does not justify the donor risks and that, therefore, recipients with increased risks should be denied an LD transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied the outcome of LD vs. deceased donor (DD) transplants in recipients with extrarenal morbidity. For recipients with extrarenal morbidity, patient survival (p < 0.01) and graft survival (p < 0.01) rates were significantly better for LD (vs. DD) transplant recipients. We found no difference in death-censored graft survival rates. CONCLUSION: Kidney transplant recipients with extrarenal morbidity benefit from an LD transplant. Both donor and recipient informed consent is important.     

Whole liver versus split liver versus living donor in the adult recipient: an analysis of outcomes by graft type

BACKGROUND: We studied patient and graft survival rates in adult liver transplant recipients, analyzing outcomes based on donor source (deceased donor [DD] vs. living donor [LD]) and graft type (whole liver vs. partial liver). METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of all adult liver transpants performed at our center over a 7-year period of time. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2005, 384 liver transplants were performed in adult recipients, either as a whole liver from a deceased donor (DD-WL, n=284), split liver from a DD (DD-SL, n=31), or a partial transplant from a living donor (LD, n=69). DD-SL transplants were performed with a full right or left lobe graft, while LD transplants used the right lobe. Demographic differences in the three groups were most noticeable for lower model for end-stage liver disease scores in LD recipients (P<0.001) and younger donor age in DD-SL recipients (P<0.001). Superior graft survival results were seen in LD recipients versus either DD-WL recipients or DD-SL recipients (P=0.02 and P=0.05, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed hepatitis C (HR=1.53, P=0.05) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR=1.74, P=0.03) to be significant risk factors for patient survival. Hepatitis C (HR=1.61, P=0.03) and donor age more than 50 (HR=1.64, P=0.04) were significant risk factors for graft survival. However, neither graft type nor donor source were significant independent risk factors for patient or graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that the status of the recipient is probably a more important determinant of outcome than graft type or donor source.     

Hepatitis C Positive Grafts may be used in Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: A Matched Analysis

Hepatitis C (HCV)-positive liver grafts have been increasingly used in patients with decompensated liver disease from HCV because of critical shortage of available organs. Fifty-nine recipients of HCV-positive grafts were matched to patients who received HCV-negative grafts. All recipients were transplanted for HCV liver disease. Matching variables were (1) status, (2) pre-transplant creatinine, (3) recipient age, (4) donor age, (5) warm ischemia time, and (6) year of transplantation. Both unmatched and matched analyses were performed on patient survival, graft survival, and time to HCV recurrence. There was no significant statistical difference in patient, graft, or HCV recurrence-free survival between recipients of HCV-positive and HCV-negative grafts with matched and unmatched analyses (p > 0.05). The 3-year estimates of HCV disease-free survival were 12% (+/- 9%) and 19% (+/- 7%) using HCV-positive and -negative grafts, respectively. The use of HCV-positive grafts in recipients with HCV does not appear to affect patient survival, graft survival, or HCV recurrence when compared with the use of HCV-negative grafts. Our results suggest that HCV-positive grafts can be used in a HCV liver transplant recipient.     

Live donor liver transplantation with older donors: Increased long‐term graft loss due to HCV recurrence

Using our prospectively collected database all adult hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐positive patients receiving an adult‐to‐adult LDLT between October 2000 and May 2014 were identified. Outcome of LDLT with grafts from younger (<50 years=128) vs older donors (≥50 years=31) was compared. Post‐transplant graft function, postoperative complications and incidence of HCV recurrence were evaluated. Long‐term graft and patient survival was calculated. No difference in graft function was observed between younger and older grafts. Overall complications were similar between both groups. The severity of complications determined by the Dindo‐Clavien score was similar. Graft loss from HCV recurrence was significantly less frequent in younger grafts (18% vs 62%, P = 0.001). Young vs older livers had a trend toward improved 1‐, 5‐, and 10‐year graft survival (89% vs 87%, 77% vs 69%, 70% vs 55%, P = 0.096), while patient survival was comparable between both groups (91% vs 90%, 78% vs 69%, 71% vs 60%, P = 0.25). In conclusion, LDLT with older vs younger grafts are more frequently associated with long‐term graft loss due to HCV recurrence. Differences in graft survival might be more prominent with prolonged (≥5‐year) follow‐up. Living donor‐recipient matching is particularly important for younger HCV‐positive recipients.     

Improving graft survival for patients undergoing liver transplantation

Dickson RC, Pungpapong S, Keaveny AP, Taner BC, Ghabril M, Aranda‐Michel J, Satyanarayana R, Bonatti H, Kramer DJ, Nguyen JH. Improving graft survival for patients undergoing liver transplantation.
Clin Transplant 2011: 25: E345–E355. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Liver transplant (LT) outcomes are reported to be improving in non‐HCV recipients but not for those infected with HCV. Our aim was to evaluate graft survival and predictors of outcome in HCV and non‐HCV patients before and after 2003. Patients with primary LT between February 1, 1998, and December 31, 2005, were included. Patients were divided into Era 1 (1998–2002) and Era 2 (2003–2005) with follow‐up through May 31, 2009. Graft survival was compared for HCV, non‐HCV, and all patients. There was significant improvement in graft survival in Era 2 for HCV patients. Graft survival in Era 2 of HCV patients was equivalent to non‐HCV patients. The most significant improvement between eras was in outcomes of grafts from donors ≥60 yr with three‐yr graft survival 58.6 (51.3–65.9) vs. 75.4 (68.9–81.9), p = 0.002. The use of donors ≥60 did not change between eras: 31% vs. 34%; however, utilization in HCV recipients decreased from 36% to 3% (p < 0.001). In conclusion, graft survival of HCV patients has improved significantly since 2003 and was comparable to non‐HCV patients up to three yr. The change in management of donor organs into HCV and non‐HCV patients likely contributed to this outcome.     

Low-dose rabbit antithymocyte globulin versus basiliximab induction therapy in low-risk renal transplant recipients: 8-year follow-up

Antibody induction is effective in preventing acute rejection, but its effects on long-term renal allograft function and survival remain controversial. Moreover, given the risks of antibody induction, full-dose lymphocyte-depleting therapy for low-risk patients is usually avoided. However, the benefit and risks associated with low-dose (Lo) rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG; 3-5 mg/kg total) induction in a low-risk population have not been explored. We now report the long-term outcomes in this patient population. We defined low risk as white, panel-reactive antibody < 30%, and non-Donor with Cardiac Death (DCD) recipients. We compared the risk of acute rejection and graft survival for both living donor (LD) and deceased donor (DD) recipients. The average dose of rATG was 3.1 ± 1.2 mg/kg. Forty DD recipients received basiliximab (BSX) and 145 patients were induced with Lo rATG. Twenty LD recipients received BSX and 64 received Lo rATG. The groups did not differ in demographics, donor characteristics, and maintenance immunosuppression. At 8 years, patient survival was higher for LD patients compared to DD recipients (91% vs 45%, P = .004). In recipients of LD kidneys, 8-year patient survivals were not different comparing Lo rATG and BSX groups (92% vs 91%, respectively, P = .55). In LD, 8-year graft survival was excellent irrespective of induction (Lo rATG 100% vs BSX 98%); however, Lo rATG was associated with a lower rate of acute rejection (7.8% vs 35% BSX, P < .01) and better mean serum creatinine at 3 and 5 years (1.2 vs 1.5, P = .02 and 1.18 vs 1.54, P = .04, respectively). For DD, Lo rATG was associated with a better long-term graft survival (86% vs 76% BSX, P = .02). Viral infections and cancer rates were similar for Lo rATG and BSX. Thus, we conclude that Lo rATG induction may add long-term benefit in low-risk patients compared to anti-interleukin-2 receptor therapy without incurring additional risks of infectious or malignant diseases.     

Corticosteroid-free immunosuppression with daclizumab in HCV(+) liver transplant recipients: 1-year interim results of the HCV-3 study.

This work is a 1-yr interim analysis of a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial evaluating the effect of corticosteroid-free immunosuppression on hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV(+)) liver transplant recipients following liver transplantation (LT). Patients received tacrolimus and corticosteroids (Arm 1; n = 80); tacrolimus, corticosteroids, and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arm 2; n = 79); or daclizumab induction, tacrolimus, and MMF (Arm 3; n = 153). At 1 yr, 64.1%, 63.4%, and 69.4% of patients achieved the composite primary endpoint of freedom from rejection, freedom from HCV recurrence, and freedom from treatment failure, respectively. Excellent patient and graft survival did not differ significantly among treatment arms. Freedom from HCV recurrence at 1 yr was 61.8 +/- 6.2%, 60.1 +/- 6.1%, and 67.0 +/- 4.3% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = not significant). Freedom from rejection was significantly higher in Arm 3 compared to Arm 1 (93.0 +/- 2.2% vs. 81.9 +/- 4.4%; P = 0.011). Multivariate analysis identified acute rejection (hazard ratio = 2.692; P = 0.001) and donor age (hazard ratio = 1.015; P = 0.001) as significant risk factors for HCV recurrence. HCV recurrence was not influenced by recipient demographics, HCV genotype, or immunosuppression. In conclusion, these results suggest that a corticosteroid-free regimen of tacrolimus and MMF following daclizumab induction is safe and effective in HCV(+) liver transplant recipients.     

The impact of donor variables on the outcome of orthotopic liver transplantation for hepatitis C

Morphologic characteristics of the graft have been proposed as a major contributor to the long-term outcomes in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Our objective was to determine the impact of donor variables, including donor age, donor-recipient HLA match, and type of donation (DCD vs donation after brain death [DBD]), on the outcome of OLT in 192 patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Fourteen patients underwent OLT from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors and 188 from DBD donors. Mean donor age, warm ischemia time at recovery, and cold ischemia time were similar between the groups. Overall graft survival rate at 1 year (55% DCD vs 85% DBD) and 5 years (46% DCD vs 78% DBD) was significantly lower in the DCD group (P = .0003). Similarly, patient survival rate at 1 year (62% DCD vs 93% DBD) and 5 years (62% DCD vs 82% DBD) was significantly lower in the DCD group (P = .0295). Incidences of hepatic artery thrombosis, portal vein thrombosis, and primary nonfunction were similar between the DCD and DBD groups. The incidence of liver abscess with ischemic-type biliary stricture was higher in recipients from DCD as compared with DBD (42% vs 2%). A trend toward lower graft survival was noted in recipients from donors older than 60 years of age in the HCV population (P = .07), with statistically lower patient survival (P = .02). Donor- recipient HLA matching did not appear to correlate with OLT outcome in patients with HCV. DCD donors and donors older than 60 years of age significantly impact patient and graft survival. Lower graft and patient survival in recipients from DCD donors does not appear to be related to early disease recurrence.     

Long-term results and modeling to predict outcomes in recipients with HCV infection: results of the NIDDK liver transplantation database.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated liver disease is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). There are, however, no long-term (>5 year) studies of comparative outcomes for recipients with HCV infection, and no models capable of identifying recipients with HCV infection at greatest risk for adverse outcomes. We prospectively determined: 1) long-term outcomes, and 2) whether pretransplant patient or donor variables can be used to predict death and/or graft loss in recipients with HCV infection. A total of 165 HCV-infected recipients were eligible for this study. Pretransplant donor and recipient characteristics and patient and graft survival data were prospectively collected. Model building for outcomes was carried out using logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic curves for different models were created and compared. Median follow-up was 8.5 years. Adjusted 10 year graft survival was 64% for recipients with HCV infection and 51% for uninfected recipients. A model incorporating pretransplant HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA), cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin (CMV IgG) serostatus, creatinine, bilirubin, prothrombin time international ratio (INR), recipient age, and donor age was developed to identify recipients at greatest risk of short-term mortality or graft loss (area under receiver operating characteristic curve = .83) In conclusion, long-term outcomes following LT for recipients with HCV infection are comparable to those for recipients undergoing LT for other indications. HCV-infected recipients at greatest risk for short-term mortality and graft loss can be identified using several readily identifiable pretransplant variables. Long-term death and graft loss specifically secondary to recurrence of HCV appears, however, to be determined primarily by factors other than those included in this analysis.     

A prospective randomized trial of mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C

Hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States. Recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection post-LT remains a problem for which there is no completely satisfactory treatment. The aim of the present study is to evaluate mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), which has both immunosuppressive and antiviral properties, to determine whether it is associated with a difference in the rate of HCV recurrence and also examine its impact on patient and graft survival. Between August 1995 and May 1998, a total of 106 patients who were HCV positive before LT were randomized to tacrolimus (TAC) and prednisone versus TAC, prednisone, and MMF therapy. The rate of recurrence of HCV, patient and graft survival, incidences of rejection, and histological findings were examined. Fifty six patients were randomized to TAC and steroid therapy (double [D] drug; group D), and 50 patients were randomized to TAC, steroid, and MMF therapy (triple [T] drug; group T). Liver biopsies were performed when liver function was abnormal; protocol liver biopsies were not performed. Mean follow-up was 4.3 [plusmn] 0.8 years. Actuarial patient survivals at 4 years were 72.6% in group D and 73.8% in group T (P = not significant). Actuarial graft survivals at 4 years were 65.6% in group D and 65.4% in group T. One patient in group D and 2 patients in group T underwent a second LT for recurrent HCV. One patient in each group died of recurrent HCV without re-LT. Twenty-six patients in group D (46.4%) and 23 patients in group T (46.0%) showed signs of recurrent HCV. Mean hepatitis activity index (HAI) scores were 7.4 [plusmn] 2.7 in group D and 7.0 [plusmn] 3.4 in group T, and mean fibrosis scores were 2.9 [plusmn] 1.7 in group D and 2.6 [plusmn] 1.1 in group T. The rate of rejection was 0.57/patient in each group for the entire follow-up period. None of these values reached statistical significance. Rates of HCV recurrence, graft loss or death from recurrent HCV, and 4-year actuarial patient and graft survival were not different between the groups. In liver transplant recipients with HCV, MMF has no impact on patient survival, graft survival, rejection, or rate of HCV recurrence based on biochemical changes and histological findings. In addition, there was no difference in HAI or fibrosis score between the two groups. Either MMF has no anti-HCV effect or its immunosuppressive properties overwhelm its antiviral effect in the clinical setting. (Liver Transpl 2002;8:40-46.)     

Effect of ischemia-reperfusion on the incidence of acute cellular rejection and timing of histologic hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Because of a critical shortage of deceased donor (DD) livers, more extended criteria allografts are being utilized; these allografts are at increased risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI). We assessed whether, in a large cohort of patients transplanted for hepatitis C virus (HCV) either via a DD or live donor (LD), there was a relationship between the degree of IRI and the frequency and timing of acute cellular rejection (ACR) and histologic HCV recurrence. METHODS: During an 8-year study, patients were separated into four groups based on peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels and three groups based on severity of IRI on postreperfusion liver biopsy. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time of 433 DD and 44 LD recipients was 1212 days. We noted a strong correlation in DD between peak ALT and the histologic degree of IRI (P = .01). There was no difference in the incidence or grade of ACR among the four groups. There was no correlation between the severity of IRI and the incidence or time to histologic recurrence of HCV. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of peak ALT correlated with the severity of IRI on postreperfusion liver biopsy. Among this large HCV cohort, there was no correlation between the severity of IRI and the incidence or timing of histologic HCV recurrence or incidence of ACR.     

A prospective randomized trial comparing tacrolimus and steroids with tacrolimus monotherapy in liver transplantation: the impact on recurrence of hepatitis C

The aim of this prospective randomized trial was to study the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus monotherapy (TACRO) and compare it with our standard treatment of tacrolimus plus steroids (TACRO + ST) after liver transplant (LT). Furthermore, the impact of steroid-free immunosuppression on outcome of hepatitis C virus (HCV) was analysed. Between 1998 and 2000, 60 patients (mean age: 57 years) were included in the study and randomized to receive TACRO (n = 28) or TACRO + ST (n = 32). Indication for LT was postnecrotic cirrhosis in all cases (58.3% were HCV-positive). Mean follow-up was 44 months. Survival, incidence of rejection, infection and side-effects were compared between the two groups. In patients with HCV infection, incidence and severity of acute hepatitis C, long-term outcome of recurrent hepatitis C and survival were studied in an intention-to-treat analysis or in the real group analysis (real-TACRO versus real-TACRO + ST). Patient survival at 1, 3 and 5 years, tacrolimus pharmacokinetics, incidence of rejection infections and side-effects were similar. In patients with HCV, the incidence and severity of graft hepatitis C tended to be lower in TACRO (47%) compared with TACRO + ST (67%) (P = NS), and also in real-TACRO (42%) compared with real-TACRO + ST (61%) (P = NS). A poor outcome considered as evolution to cirrhosis at 3 years was observed in one (9%) living patient in real-TACRO and nine (45%) in real-TACRO + ST (P = 0.04). Patient survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 92%, 92% and 73% for real-TACRO and 78%, 61% and 51% for real TACRO + ST (P = 0.07). Steroid-free immunosuppression appears to be safe and efficacious. The main advantage of this regimen could be in HCV patients, as recurrence of hepatitis in the graft was less severe in the group of patients in whom steroids could be avoided completely.     

Trends in post-liver transplant survival in patients with hepatitis C between 1991 and 2001 in the United States.

It has been suggested that the post-liver transplantation (LT) survival rate of patients with hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) has declined in recent years. To compare the outcome of LT in patients with HCV at various time intervals between 1991 and 2001, we used United Network for Organ Sharing data to compare the post-LT survival of adult patients (age >18 years) with HCV with those without HCV. Of the 37,101 patients who underwent LT during the study period, 28,193 patients (HCV 7,459 and 20,734 non-HCV) were eligible for the study. On the basis of the time of transplantation, patients were divided into 3 groups: 1991-1993 (period 1), 1994-1997 (period 2), and 1998-2001 (period 3). The patient and graft survival rates were adjusted for other known confounding variables that influenced outcomes. The 3-year patient survival rate was lower in HCV patients compared with non-HCV recipients (78.5% vs. 81.4%, hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.23, P = 0.001). The graft (72.8%, 71.0%, and 69.8%) and patient (77.4%, 79.6%, and 78.5%) survival of HCV patients remained unchanged during study periods 1-3, respectively. However, the graft and patient survival rates of non-HCV recipients improved markedly during study periods 2 and 3 compared with period 1. The graft and patient survival has remained unchanged between 1991 and 2001 in HCV recipients, but during the same period, there was a great improvement in survival among non-HCV recipients.     

Liver retransplantation of patients with hepatitis C infection is associated with acceptable patient and graft survival.

Infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause of liver transplantation (LT), while liver retransplantation (RT) for HCV is controversial as a result of concerns over poor outcomes. We sought to compare patient and graft survival after RT in patients with and without HCV. We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing RT at our center between February 1998 and April 2004. Indications for RT, HCV status, patient, and donor characteristics, laboratory values, and hospitalization status at RT were collected. A total of 108 patients (48 HCV and 60 non-HCV) underwent RT during the study period, with mean post-RT follow-up of 1,096 days (range, 0-2,888 days). Grafts from donors aged>60 years were used less frequently in HCV patients at RT (6%) compared with LT (47%), P<0.001. There was no difference between HCV vs. non-HCV patients in 1- and 3-year patient survival (respectively, 79% vs. 63%, and 71% vs. 63%) and graft survival (respectively, 67% vs. 66%, and 59% vs. 56%). Post-RT mortality and graft failure in HCV patients occurred within the first year in 89% of patients, and 83% were unrelated to HCV recurrence. We conclude that patients should not be excluded from consideration for retransplantation solely on the basis of a diagnosis of HCV.     

Improving Outcomes of Liver Retransplantation: An Analysis of Trends and the Impact of Hepatitis C Infection

Retransplantation (RT) in Hepatitis C (HCV) patients remains controversial. Aims: To study trends in RT and evaluate the impact of HCV status in the context of a comprehensive recipient and donor risk assessment. The UNOS database between 1994 and October 2005 was utilized to analyze 46  982 LT and RT. Graft and patient survival along with patient and donor characteristics were compared for 2283 RT performed in HCV and non-HCV patients during 1994–1997, 1998–2001 and 2002–October 2005. Overall HCV prevalence at RT increased from 36% in the initial period to 40.6% after 2002. In our study group, 1-year patient and graft survival post-RT improved over the same time intervals from 65.0% to 70.7% and 54.87% to 65.8%, respectively. HCV was only associated with decreased patient and graft survival with a retransplant (LT-RT) interval (RI) >90 days. Independent predictors of mortality for RT with RI >90 days were patient age, MELD score >25, RI <1 year, warm ischemia time ≥75 min and donor age ≥60 (significant for HCV patients only). Outcomes of RT are improving, but can be optimized by weighing recipient factors, anticipation of operative factors and donor selection.     

Operative Risks of Domino Liver Transplantation for the Familial Amyloid Polyneuropathy Liver Donor and Recipient: A Double Analysis

Although domino liver transplantation (LT) is an established procedure, data about the operative risks are limited. This study aimed at evaluating the operative risks of domino LT. Two retrospective analyses were conducted (comparison of familial amyloid polyneuropathy [FAP] liver donors [61 patients] vs. FAP nondonors [39 patients] and FAP liver recipients [61 patients] vs. deceased donor liver recipients [61 patients]). First analysis showed a 60‐day mortality of 6.6% for FAP donors and 7.7% for FAP nondonors (p = 1.0). No patient developed primary graft nonfunction. Acute rejection was higher in FAP nondonors compared to FAP donors (38.5% vs. 13.1%). Both groups had similar vascular and biliary complication rates. ICU stay was similar, whereas total hospitalization was longer for FAP nondonors. Both groups had similar 1‐ and 5‐year patient and graft survival rates (83.4% vs. 87.2%, and 79.8% vs. 71.8%, p = 0.7) and (83.3% vs. 87.2%, and 79.1% vs.71.8%, p = 0.7). The second analysis showed a 1.6% mortality for FAP liver recipients vs. 3.2% of the control group (p = 1). Both groups had similar morbidity and technical complication rates (18.0% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.45) and (0.18 vs. 0.15, p = 0.65). The domino procedure does not add any risk to FAP donor or recipient. It increases the organ pool allowing transplantation of marginal recipients who otherwise are denied deceased donor liver transplantation.