Survival of Liver Transplant Patients Coinfected with HIV and HCV Is Adversely Impacted by Recurrent Hepatitis C

Although liver transplantation (LTx) in HIV-positive patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has been successful, some have reported poorer outcomes in patients coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Here we discuss the impact of recurrent HCV on 27 HIV-positive patients who underwent LTx. HIV infection was well controlled post-transplantation. Survival in HIV-positive/HCV-positive patients was shorter compared to a cohort of HIV-negative/HCV-positive patients matched in age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and time of transplant, with cumulative 1-, 3- and 5-year patient survival of 66.7%, 55.6% and 33.3% versus 75.7%, 71.6% and 71.6%, respectively, although not significantly (p = 0.07), and there was a higher likelihood of developing cirrhosis or dying from an HCV-related complication in coinfected subjects (RR = 2.6, 95% CI, 1.06-6.35; p = 0.03). Risk factors for poor survival included African-American race (p = 0.02), MELD score > 20 (p = 0.05), HAART intolerance postLTx (p = 0.01), and postLTx HCV RNA > 30000000 IU/mL (p = 0.00). Recurrent HCV in 18 patients was associated with eight deaths, including three from fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Among surviving coinfected recipients, five are alive at least 3 years after LTx, and of 15 patients treated with interferon-alpha/ribavirin, six (40%) are HCV RNA negative, including four with sustained virological response. Hepatitis C is a major cause of graft loss and patient mortality in coinfected patients undergoing LTx.     

HIV-positive renal recipients can achieve survival rates similar to those of HIV-negative patients

BACKGROUND: Although patients positive for HIV were once thought to be unsuitable candidates for kidney transplantation, their increasing numbers with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy has indicated that they should no longer be excluded for transplantation. To counteract suggestions that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients received suboptimal kidneys, we provide studies of kidneys transplanted from the same donor into patients with and without HIV. METHODS: United Network for Organ Sharing kidney transplant data between 1997 and 2004 were analyzed. Graft and patient survival of 38 HIV patients who had received a renal transplant were compared with the survival of 38 recipients who had received a graft from the same donor. RESULTS: The 38 HIV-positive recipients were younger (49.0 vs. 52.3 years, P=0.14) and had lower peak panel-reactive antibodies (PRA; 5.1% vs. 15.6%, P=0.07) when compared with their bilateral donor to HIV-negative recipients. Sirolimus was used more frequently in HIV patients than in non-HIV patients (36.8% vs. 23.7%, P=0.09). The serum creatinine at 1, 3, and 5 years posttransplantation were higher in HIV patients when compared to non-HIV patients. Although not statistically significant, graft survival was higher among HIV-positive patients compared with their negative controls (76.1% vs. 65.1% at 5 years, P=0.21), as was patient survival (91.3% vs. 87.3% at 5 years, P=0.72). More grafts failed due to death with a functioning graft than rejection in HIV-positive patients. CONCLUSION: This study supports the position that there is no longer an ethical question surrounding the use of kidneys for HIV-positive patients.     

Waitlist Outcomes of Liver Transplant Candidates Who Were Reprioritized Under Share 35

Under Share 35, deceased donor (DD) livers are offered regionally to candidates with Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores ≥35 before being offered locally to candidates with MELD scores <35. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from June 2013 to June 2015, we identified 1768 DD livers exported to regional candidates with MELD scores ≥35 who were transplanted at a median MELD score of 39 (interquartile range [IQR] 37–40) with 30‐day posttransplant survival of 96%. In total, 1764 (99.8%) exports had an ABO‐compatible candidate in the recovering organ procurement organization (OPO), representing 1219 unique reprioritized candidates who would have had priority over the regional candidate under pre–Share 35 allocation. Reprioritized candidates had a median waitlist MELD score of 31 (IQR 27–34) when the liver was exported. Overall, 291 (24%) reprioritized candidates had a comparable MELD score (within 3 points of the regional recipient), and 209 (72%) were eventually transplanted in 11 days (IQR 3–38 days) using a local (50%), regional (50%) or national (<1%) liver; 60 (21%) died, 13 (4.5%) remained on the waitlist and nine (3.1%) were removed for other reasons. Of those eventually transplanted, MELD score did not increase in 57%; it increased by 1–3 points in 37% and by ≥4 points in 5.7% after the export. In three cases, OPOs exchanged regional exports within a 24‐h window. The majority of comparable reprioritized candidates were not disadvantaged; however, 21% died after an export.     

Continued Influence of Preoperative Renal Function on Outcome of Orthotopic Liver Transplant (OLTX) in the US: Where Will MELD Lead Us?

Renal function is a component of the Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD), We queried the 1999-2004 OPTN/UNOS database to determine whether preoperative renal function remained an important determinant of survival in primary deceased donor liver transplant alone patients (DDLTA) or primary combined kidney liver transplant patients (KLTX). We examined preoperative creatinine, renal replacement therapy (RRT), incidence of KLTX, and patient survival in the 34 months before and after introduction of MELD and performed a multivariate Cox regression analysis of time to death. Preoperative renal function is an independent predictor of survival in DDLTA but not in KLTX. When compared to DDLTA with a preoperative serum creatinine of 0-0.99 mg/dL, patients with serum creatinine from 1-1.99 mg/dL, >2.0 mg/dL, those requiring RRT, and those receiving KLTX had a relative risk of death following transplant of 1.11, 1.58, 1.77, and 1.44 respectively. KLTX requiring RRT had better survival than DDLTA requiring RRT. Since introduction of MELD, KLTX, preoperative creatinine, and number of patients requiring preoperative RRT have increased. Despite this, patient survival following orthotopic liver transplant (OLTX) in the 34 months after introduction of MELD is not different than prior to introduction of MELD.     

Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation (SOFT) Score: A Novel Method to Predict Patient Survival Following Liver Transplantation

It is critical to balance waitlist mortality against posttransplant mortality. Our objective was to devise a scoring system that predicts recipient survival at 3 months following liver transplantation to complement MELD‐predicted waitlist mortality. Univariate and multivariate analysis on 21 673 liver transplant recipients identified independent recipient and donor risk factors for posttransplant mortality. A retrospective analysis conducted on 30 321 waitlisted candidates reevaluated the predictive ability of the Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. We identified 13 recipient factors, 4 donor factors and 2 operative factors (warm and cold ischemia) as significant predictors of recipient mortality following liver transplantation at 3 months. The Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplant (SOFT) Score utilized 18 risk factors (excluding warm ischemia) to successfully predict 3‐month recipient survival following liver transplantation. This analysis represents a study of waitlisted candidates and transplant recipients of liver allografts after the MELD score was implemented. Unlike MELD, the SOFT score can accurately predict 3‐month survival following liver transplantation. The most significant risk factors were previous transplantation and life support pretransplant. The SOFT score can help clinicians determine in real time which candidates should be transplanted with which allografts. Combined with MELD, SOFT can better quantify survival benefit for individual transplant procedures.     

Liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure: importance of renal failure

Abstract One hundred eighty-one consecutive patients with fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) presenting in a 2-year period were reviewed. In this cohort we examined the impact of pretransplant renal failure on mortality and morbidity following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx). Twenty-seven patients (18 female, 9 male) with a median age of 43.5 years (range 19–65 years) underwent OLTx. FHF was due to idiosyncratic drug reaction ( n = 4), paracetamol overdose ( n = 3), seronegative hepatitis ( n = 17), hepatitis B ( n = 1), veno-occlusive disease ( n = 1), and Wilson's disease ( n = 1). Renal failure was present in 14 patients, 7 of whom died (whereas there was 100 % survival in patients without renal failure). Pretransplant renal failure was associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation (13 days vs 6 days, P = 0.05), prolonged intensive care stay (17 days vs 8 days, P - 0.01) and prolonged hospital stay (27 vs 21 days, P = NS). Pretransplant renal failure did not predict renal dysfunction at 1 year after OLTx. We conclude that the survival of patients transplanted for FHF is inferior to that of patients transplanted for chronic liver disease (67 % vs 88 % 1-year survival in Birmingham). For patients with FHF undergoing transplantation, pretransplant renal failure strongly predicts poor outcome with significantly greater consumption of resources.     

Pretransplant MELD Score As a Predictor of Outcome After Liver Transplantation for Chronic Hepatitis C

The Model of End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, an accurate predictor of mortality in patients awaiting liver transplantation (OLTX), did not predict graft or patient survival in the post-transplant setting. Our aim was to test the model in patients who underwent OLTX for chronic hepatitis C. Two hundred and eighty-seven adult patients who underwent primary OLTX for chronic hepatitis C between December 1993 and September 1999 were studied from a prospectively maintained database. The group was stratified by MELD scores of less than 15, 15-24, and greater than 24. Patient survival, graft survival, and interval liver biopsy pathology were reviewed. Both patient and graft survival at 3, 6, and 12 months were significantly lower in the higher MELD score groups, as was patient survival at 24 months (p-values, 0.01-0.05). The difference in survival between the low, medium, and high MELD score groups increases in time. The survival without bridging fibrosis in the allograft at 1 year post-transplant was significantly lower with higher MELD scores (p = 0.037). The decrease in survival seen in hepatitis C patients with MELD scores greater than 24 raises questions of transplant suitability for these patients. Therapeutic modalities to decrease post-transplant graft injury in these patients should be explored.     

Catheter-related bacteraemia in haemodialysis patients with HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Tunnelled catheters are used for dialysis in over 25% of haemodialysis (HD) patients and are a major risk factor for bacteraemia. HIV-positive patients may be at particularly increased risk of catheter-related bacteraemia (CRB) due to their immunocompromised state. The present case-controlled study compared catheter-related bacteraemia with HIV-positive and HIV-negative haemodialysis patients. METHODS: Using a prospective computerized vascular access database, we identified 33 HIV-positive haemodialysis patients who had a tunneled dialysis catheter placed during a 6.5-year period. Their catheter outcomes were compared with those observed in 55 age-, sex- and access date-matched control haemodialysis patients. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, diabetes, hypertension and peripheral vascular disease, but the HIV patients were more likely to be black (94 vs 76%, P=0.03). CRB occurred in 52% of the HIV patients and 49% of the controls (P=0.83). The median infection-free catheter survival was similar in HIV-positive and negative patients (165 vs 119 days, P=0.12). Among patients with CRB, the likelihood of a Gram-negative infection was similar in both groups (18 vs 30%, P=0.37). However, polymicrobial CRB was more likely in HIV patients (41 vs 15%, P=0.049). HIV-positive patients were more likely to be hospitalized for treatment of CRB than HIV-negative patients (29 vs 7%, P=0.05). CONCLUSION: CRB is equally likely in HIV-positive and control haemodialysis patients. However, CRB is likely to be more severe in HIV-positive patients, as judged from the greater likelihood of polymicrobial infection and of hospitalization.     

OPTN Policy Regarding Prioritization of Patients with Hepatopulmonary Syndrome: Does It Provide Equitable Organ Allocation?

United Network for Organ Transplantation (UNOS) policy 3.6.4.5.1 provides exception points to patients diagnosed with hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS) to compensate for their reported increased mortality risk. We compared pre- and posttransplant and overall outcomes in 255 patients receiving exception points under this policy (HPS policy patients) with 32 358 nonexception control patients listed in the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) era to determine whether the intent of the policy is being met .
Overall, 92.5% of HPS policy patients versus 45.5% of controls had been transplanted, 5.1% versus 31.2% remained on waiting list and 1.5% versus 14.1% had died while awaiting transplant (p < 0.0001 for each comparison). Relative risk (RR) of death for HPS policy patients compared to controls was 0.158 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.059–0.420, p = 0.0002) pretransplant, and 0.827 (CI: 0.587–1.170, p = 0.28) posttransplant. Overall (combined waitlist and posttransplant) RR of death was 0.514 (CI: 0.374–0.707, p = 0.00004) compared with controls. After adjustment for laboratory MELD, overall RR was 0.807 (CI: 0.587–1.110, p = 0.19), indicating that HPS policy patients' mortality risk would be similar to that of controls had they been listed with their laboratory MELD score.
HPS policy patients have a significant pretransplant survival advantage over standard liver transplant candidates because of the exception points awarded, and have similar posttransplant survival. Better criteria for diagnosing and grading of HPS are required.     

Long-term outcomes of orthotopic liver transplantation in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients and comparison with human immunodeficiency virus-negative cases

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positivity is no longer a contraindication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) due to the efficacy of antiretroviral therapy. The aim of this study was to compare OLT among HIV-positive and HIV-negative cohorts; the results were also stratified for hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection. Between 2004 and 2009, all HIV-infected patients undergoing OLT from heart-beating deceased donors (n = 27) were compared with an HIV-negative cohort (n = 27). The pure HCV infection rate was similar between HIV-positive and HIV-negative subjects (63% each). HIV-positive recipients were younger (P = .013). The CD4 count for HIV-positive subjects was 376 ± 156 at transplantation. The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score at transplantation was 15 ± 7 in both groups (P = .92). No differences were observed for donor age (P = .72) or time on the waiting list (P = .56). The median follow-up was 26 (range, 1-64) and 27 months (range, 1-48) for HIV and non-HIV recipients, respectively (P = .85). The estimated 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 88%, 83%, and 83% versus 100%, 73%, and 73% (P = .95), and 92%, 87%, and 87% versus 95%, 88%, and 88% (P = .59) for HIV and non-HIV cases, respectively. HIV/HCV-coinfected patients were younger, namely 47 (range, 40-53) versus 52 years (range, 37-68; P = .003), and displayed lower MELD scores at transplantation compared with HCV-mono-infected patients 10 (range, 7-19) versus 17 (range, 8-30) (P = .008). For HIV/HCV-coinfected and HCV-mono-infected cases the estimated 1-, 3-, and 5-year patients and graft survival rates were respectively 93%, 76%, and 76% versus 100%, 70%, and 60% (P = .99) and 93%, 84%, and 84% versus 100%, 70%, and 60% (P = .64), respectively. No difference was observed in the histological severity of HCV recurrence. In conclusion, under specific, well-determined conditions, OLT can be a safe, efficacious procedure in HIV patients.     

Arteriovenous access outcomes in haemodialysis patients with HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Arteriovenous (AV) grafts in haemodialysis patients usually fail due to thrombosis or infection. There is limited information on whether graft outcomes in HIV-positive haemodialysis patients differ from those in HIV-negative controls. METHODS: Using a prospective, computerized vascular access database, we identified retrospectively 15 HIV-positive dialysis patients having a graft placed during a 6.5-year period (January 1999 to June 2005), and compared their graft outcomes to those observed in 30 age-, sex- and access date-matched HIV-negative control patients. In addition, the outcomes of AV fistulas in 23 HIV-positive patients were compared with those observed in 32 matched HIV-negative controls. RESULTS: Thrombosis-free graft survival was substantially worse among the HIV-positive patients than in the HIV-negative controls (1-year survival, 17% vs 62%). The hazard ratio for graft thrombosis in the HIV-positive patients was 3.22 (95% CI, 1.66-10.32, P = 0.002). Infection-free graft survival was also lower in HIV-positive patients (hazard ratio 3.51; 95% CI, 1.21-18.85, P = 0.025). Finally, cumulative graft survival (from creation until permanent failure) tended to be lower in HIV-positive patients (1 year survival, 41% vs 65%, P = 0.07). The primary failure rate of fistulas (those never usable for dialysis) was similar in HIV-positive patients and in their controls (44% vs 41%, P = 0.83). Cumulative fistula survival was similar for HIV-positive and negative patients (hazard ratio 1.32; 95% CI, 0.65-3.58, P = 0.33). CONCLUSION: AV grafts have inferior outcomes in HIV-positive patients as compared with HIV-negative patients, whereas fistulas have a similar survival in both groups.     

The effect of HAART on salivary microbiota in the Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS).

OBJECTIVE: Study the prevalence of potentially pathogenic microorganisms in saliva of HIV-positive women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study. STUDY DESIGN: 157 HIV-positive and 31 HIV-negative women were studied. At baseline and every 6 months over 4 years, information was collected on socioeconomic and educational status, oral and systemic health, including HIV markers and antiretroviral therapy, and frequency of professional oral care utilization. Bacterial and yeast pathogenic isolates from stimulated whole saliva were tentatively identified using standard methodologies. RESULTS: The prevalence of microorganisms in stimulated saliva of HIV-positive women was not significantly different from that of HIV-negative women. In HIV-positive women, highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was independently and significantly associated with the presence of a variety of salivary bacterial species. HAART increased the risk for recovering Fusobacterium species (P < .001), enteric gram-negative rods (P < .05), Peptostreptococcus micros (P < .05), Campylobacter species (P < .0001), Eubacterium species (P < .001), and Tannerella forsythia (P < .01). In contrast, HAART led to decreased recovery rate of yeasts (Candida albicans and Candida dubliniensis) (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The present findings suggest that the institution of HAART promotes an increasingly pathogenic salivary microbiota, at least temporarily. Similar findings have been reported for various nonoral microbial ecosystems.     

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.     

Outcome of HCV/HIV‐Coinfected Liver Transplant Recipients: A Prospective and Multicenter Cohort Study

Eighty‐four HCV/HIV‐coinfected and 252‐matched HCV‐monoinfected liver transplant recipients were included in a prospective multicenter study. Thirty‐six (43%) HCV/HIV‐coinfected and 75 (30%) HCV‐monoinfected patients died, with a survival rate at 5 years of 54% (95% CI, 42–64) and 71% (95% CI, 66 to 77; p = 0.008), respectively. When both groups were considered together, HIV infection was an independent predictor of mortality (HR, 2.202; 95% CI, 1.420–3.413 [p < 0.001]). Multivariate analysis of only the HCV/HIV‐coinfected recipients, revealed HCV genotype 1 (HR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.32–6.76), donor risk index (HR, 9.48; 95% CI, 2.75–32.73) and negative plasma HCV RNA (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03–0.62) to be associated with mortality. When this analysis was restricted to pretransplant variables, we identified three independent factors (HCV genotype 1, pretransplant MELD score and centers with <1 liver transplantation/year in HIV‐infected patients) that allowed us to identify a subset of 60 (71%) patients with a similar 5‐year prognosis (69%[95% CI, 54–80]) to that of HCV‐monoinfected recipients. In conclusion, 5‐year survival in HCV/HIV‐coinfected liver recipients was lower than in HCV‐monoinfected recipients, although an important subset with a favorable prognosis was identified in the former.     

Liver transplantation in HIV-positive patients

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of liver transplantation (OLT) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfected patients in Italy. METHODS: Between September 2002 and April 2006, 12 HIV(+) coinfected patients (11 men, mean age 42 years) underwent OLT at our Institute. Eleven (91%) patients were HCV-positive and one was hepatitis B virus-positive. Pre-OLT plasma HIV 1-RNA level was undetectable and CD4(+) T-cell count >200 cells/microL for 3 months in all patients. Six patients had to stop highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) before OLT because of liver disease severity (n = 2) and for hepato cellular carcinoma (n = 4). RESULTS: The actuarial 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 83.3%, 58.3%, and 58.3%, respectively, which were significantly lower than those observed among HIV-negative patients transplanted in our center. Six patients are alive with a mean follow-up of 26 months (range: 5 to 46 months). We recorded a low rate of opportunistic infections and rejection. All alive patients have low levels of HIV RNA, and the CD4(+) T-cell counts increased after OLT. Nine patients developed early recurrence of hepatitis C requiring combination therapy with peg-interferon plus ribavirin. Significant improvement in the quality of life was observed in 7/11 patients. CONCLUSIONS: OLT in HIV-positive patients was feasible with good results in the short and medium term. Early severe HCV recurrence may be observed. Key challenges for the management of HIV(+) patients after transplantation included treatment of severe HCV recurrence and attention to the pharmacological interactions of HAART with immunosuppressive drugs.     

Assessing Variation in the Costs of Care Among Patients Awaiting Liver Transplantation

Previous economic analyses of liver transplantation have focused on the cost of the transplant and subsequent care. Accurate characterization of the pretransplant costs, indexed to severity of illness, is needed to assess the economic burden of liver disease. A novel data set linking Medicare claims with transplant registry data for 15 710 liver transplant recipients was used to determine average monthly waitlist spending (N = 249 434 waitlist months) using multivariable linear regression models to adjust for recipient characteristics including Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Characteristics associated with higher spending included older age, female gender, hepatocellular carcinoma, diabetes, hypertension and increasing MELD score (p < 0.05 for all). Spending increased exponentially with severity of illness: expected monthly spending at a MELD score of 30 was 10 times higher than at MELD of 20 ($22 685 vs. $2030). Monthly spending within MELD strata also varied geographically. For candidates with a MELD score of 35, spending varied from $19 548 (region 10) to $36 099 (region 7). Regional variation in waitlist costs may reflect the impact of longer waiting times on greater pretransplant hospitalization rates among high MELD score patients. Reducing the number of high MELD waitlist patients through improved medical management and novel organ allocation systems could decrease total spending for end‐stage liver care.     

Addition of serum sodium into the MELD score predicts waiting list mortality better than MELD alone.

In this study, we investigated the prognostic value of serum sodium and hyponatremia (< or =130 mEq/L) in 262 cirrhotic patients consecutively listed, 19 of which died (7%), 175 survived (67%), and 68 underwent liver transplantation (26%) during 3 months of follow-up. Hyponatremia was present in 63% of patients who died, compared to 13% of those who survived (P < .001), whereas the proportion with elevated creatinine (> or =1.4 mg/dL) was low and similar in both groups (10.5 vs. 3%). Prevalence of hyponatremia was higher than that of elevated serum creatinine across all model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) categories. Using logistic regression, hyponatremia and serum sodium were significant predictors of mortality with concordance statistics (c-statistics) .753 for hyponatremia, .784 for sodium, .894 for MELD, .905 for MELD plus hyponatremia (P = .006 vs. MELD alone), and .908 for MELD plus serum sodium (P = .026 vs. MELD alone). Risk of death across all MELD scores was higher for patients with hyponatremia than without hyponatremia. Cox regression considering data within 6 months of follow-up yielded qualitatively similar results, with hyponatremia being a significant predictor of greater mortality risk with an odds ratio of 2.65 (P = .015). Each increase of 1 mEq/L of serum sodium level was associated with a decreased odds ratio of .95 (P = .048). Our results indicate that hyponatremia appears to be an earlier and more sensitive marker than serum creatinine to detect renal impairment and / or circulatory dysfunction in patients with advanced cirrhosis. In conclusion, addition of serum sodium to MELD identified a subgroup of patients with poor outcome in a more efficient way than MELD alone and significantly increased the efficacy of the score to predict waitlist mortality.     

Is MELD score sufficient to predict not only death on waiting list,but also post‐transplant survival?

Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has emerged as a useful tool in predicting mortality in patients awaiting liver transplantation. There is still, however, discussion as to whether further parameters could improve the sensitivity and specificity of the MELD score. From 1997 to 2003, 621 adult patients with end-stage liver disease were listed for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Patients suffering from hepatoma were excluded from analysis (113 patients). The MELD score was investigated at the time of listing (MELD ON) and of coming off the list (MELD OFF). Patients who died while on the waiting list showed a significant increase in their MELD score during the waiting time (MELD ON: 21 +/- 7 vs. MELD OFF: 28 +/- 9) as well as a significantly higher MELD ON compared with patients who were transplanted (MELD ON: 16 +/- 5 vs. MELD OFF: 17 +/- 7) or removed from the waiting list (MELD ON: 16 +/- 6 vs. MELD OFF: 12 +/- 3). Multivariate analysis identified MELD ON, ascites and recurrent infection as independent risk factors for death on the waiting list (P < 0.01). MELD score was not identified as a predictor for the post-transplant survival rate. MELD score is a strong predictor for death on the waiting list, but refractory ascites and recurrent infection are independent risk factors, too.     

Increased incidence of chronic rejection in adult patients transplanted for autoimmune hepatitis: assessment of risk factors

BACKGROUND/AIM: It remains uncertain whether autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), as an original indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTX), predisposes to the development of chronic rejection (CR) after surgery and published reports on heterogeneous groups of patients provided conflicting data. In this work we analyzed the incidence and risk factors for CR in a large cohort of adult patients transplanted for AIH in our unit. RESULTS: A total of 1190 adult patients received OLTX in our center between 1982 and 1998. A total of 77 patients (6.5%) were transplanted for AIH and 12 (15.6%) patients from this group developed clinical and histological features of CR within a median time of 3.5 months after OLTX. Patients with AIH who developed CR were younger than other AIH patients at OLTX (32 vs. 44.2 ys; P=0.015) and more often had histological features of moderate or severe acute rejection (83 vs. 34%; P=0.002) on early post-OLTX biopsies. The incidence of CR in AIH patients was significantly higher than in subjects transplanted for other indications such as primary biliary cirrhosis (8.2%; P<0.05), primary sclerosing cholangitis (5.2%; P<0.05) or alcoholic cirrhosis (2.0%; P<0.001). Also, we observed a tendency to decreased incidence of CR with time in all transplanted subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Apart from younger age at OLTX and higher incidence of severe acute rejection, patients with AIH who developed CR did not differ from other subjects transplanted for this indication. Unlike other studies, not stratified by diagnosis, recipient CMV negative status, young donor age, and HLA DR matching were not identified as risk factors for CR in AIH.     

The MELD score may help to determine optimum time for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score is a good predictor of mortality on the waiting list and short-term survival post liver transplantation. Aim: Our aim was to determine if there is a pretransplant MELD score beyond which liver transplantation is prohibitive. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six adult patients underwent primary liver transplantation from January 1996 to December 2002. Patients followed to the most recent visit or death underwent survival analysis using Cox regression and Kaplan Meier methods. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between the pretransplant MELD score and survival at 6 months posttransplant (P=.037 95% CI: 1.004-1.13). Patients with pretransplant MELD score greater than or equal to 32 showed significantly greater mortality compared with those less than 32 (HR 9.18, 95%CI=1.16-72.44). CONCLUSION: Pretransplant MELD may help to determine the optimum time for liver transplantation.