Impact of donor age on survival and fibrosis progression in patients with hepatitis C undergoing liver transplantation using HCV+ allografts.

Studies have suggested that the use of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive (HCV+) donor allografts has no impact on survival. However, no studies have examined the effect that HCV+ donor histology has upon recipient and graft survival. We evaluated the clinical outcome and impact of histological features in HCV patients transplanted using HCV+ livers. We reviewed all patients transplanted for HCV at our institution from 1988 to 2004; 39 received HCV+ allografts and 580 received HCV-negative (HCV-) allografts. Survival curves compared graft and patient survival. Each HCV+ allograft was stringently matched to a control of HCV- graft recipients. No significant difference in survival was noted between recipients of HCV+ livers and controls. Patients receiving HCV+ allografts from older donors (age > or =50 yr) had higher rates of graft failure (hazard ratio, 2.74) and death rates (hazard ratio, 2.63) compared to HCV- allograft recipients receiving similarly-aged older donor livers. Matched case-control analysis revealed that recipients of HCV+ allografts had more severe fibrosis post-liver transplantation than recipients of HCV- livers (P = 0.008). More advanced fibrosis was observed in HCV+ grafts from older donors compared to HCV+ grafts from younger donors (P = 0.012). In conclusion, recipients of HCV+ grafts from older donors have higher rates of death and graft failure, and develop more extensive fibrosis than HCV- graft recipients from older donors. Recipients of HCV+ grafts, regardless of donor age, develop more advanced liver fibrosis than recipients of HCV- grafts.     

Factors differentially correlated with the outcome of liver transplantation in hcv+ and HCV- recipients

BACKGROUND: Survival following liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV) is significantly poorer than for liver transplants performed for other causes of chronic liver disease. The factors responsible for the inferior outcome in HCV+ recipients, and whether they differ from factors associated with survival in HCV- recipients, are unknown. METHODS: The UNOS database was analyzed to identify factors associated with outcome in HCV+ and HCV- recipients. Kaplan-Meier graft and patient survival and Cox proportional hazards analysis were conducted on 13,026 liver transplants to identify the variables that were differentially associated with outcome survival in HCV- and HCV+ recipients. RESULTS: Of the 13,026 recipients, 7386 (56.7%) were HCV- and 5640 were HCV+. In HCV- and HCV+ recipient populations, five-year patient survival rates were 83.5% vs. 74.6% (P<0.00001) and five-year graft survival rates 80.6% vs. 69.9% (P<0.00001), respectively. In a multivariate regression model, donor age and recipient creatinine were observed to be significant covariates in both groups, while donor race, cold ischemia time (CIT), female to male transplants, and recipient albumin were independent predictors of survival of HCV- recipients. In the HCV+ cohort, recipient race, warm ischemia time (WIT), and diabetes also independently predicted graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: A number of parameters are differentially correlated with outcome in HCV- and HCV+ recipients of orthotopic liver transplantation. These findings may not only have practical implications in the selection and management of liver transplant patients, but also may shed new insight into the biology of HCV infection posttransplant.     

Extended Criteria Donors in Liver Transplantation: Adapting Donor Quality and Recipient

Despite the progressive increase in the number of liver transplantations, the mortality on the waiting list remains between 5% and 10%, and patients have to deal with longer waiting periods. Facing this situation, transplant centers have developed alternatives to increase the number of grafts by accepting donors who were previously considered to be inadequate, because they are at higher risk of initial poor function and graft failure or may cause disease transmission. Currently, some marginal donors are being routinely used: elderly donors, steatotic grafts, non-heart-beating donors, hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) or hepatitis B core antibody-positive donors. These so-called marginal or extended-criteria donors were initially used in high-risk or urgent recipients; however, the number of marginal grafts has significantly increased, forcing the transplant community toward their more rationale use to maintain excellent results of liver transplantation. In this new scenario, the adequacy between donor and recipient may be paramount. Advanced donor age seems to be related to a greater graft failure rate in HCV+ recipients. Early survival seems to be significantly reduced when steatotic grafts are used in recipients with high Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. Moreover, a decreased survival has been observed among high-risk patients receiving organs from marginal donors. No benefit seems to exist when high-donor risk index grafts are transplanted into recipients with low MELD Scores. The recognition of various donor groups according to their quality and the need for good donor and recipient selection must lead us to define new policies for organ allocation of marginal grafts that may come into conflict with current policies of organ allocation according to the risk of death among patients awaiting a liver transplantation.     

Liver allografts from hepatitis C positive donors can offer good outcomes in hepatitis C positive recipients: a US National Transplant Registry analysis

Organ donors are screened for the hepatitis C antibody (anti‐HCV) and those with positive tests can be used under extended criteria donation. However, there is still a question of long‐term organ viability. The aim of this study was to assess the long‐term outcomes of anti‐HCV positive (HCV+) liver grafts. The US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Scientific Registry was reviewed for the period from April 1994 to February 6, 2008 and 56 275 liver transplantations were analyzed. In total, there were 19 496 HCV+ recipients and 934 HCV+ donors. Patient and graft survival were assessed accounting for both donor and recipient anti‐HCV status. Multivariable proportional hazards survival models were developed to adjust for factors known to affect post‐transplant survival. With anti‐HCV negative (HCV?) recipient/HCV? donor as the reference, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was similar for HCV+ recipient/HCV? donor compared with HCV+ recipient/HCV+ donor (1.176 vs. 1.165, P = 0.91). Our results suggest that HCV+ liver donors do not subject the HCV+ recipient to an increased risk for death over the HCV? donor, keeping in mind that careful donor and recipient selection is critical for the proper use of these extended criteria donors.     

How can we utilize livers from advanced aged donors for liver transplantation for hepatitis C?

Advanced age donors have inferior outcomes of liver transplantation for Hepatitis C (HCV). Aged donors grafts may be transplanted into young or low model for end stage liver disease (MELD) patients in order to offset the effect of donor age. However, it is not well understood how to utilize liver grafts from advanced aged donors for HCV patients. Using the UNOS database, we retrospectively studied 7508 HCV patients who underwent primary liver transplantation. Risk factors for graft failure and graft survival using advanced aged grafts (donor age ≥ 60 years) were analyzed by Cox hazards models, donor risk index (DRI) and organ patient index (OPI). Recipient's age did not affect on graft survival regardless of donor age. Advanced aged grafts had significant inferior survival compared to younger aged grafts regardless of MELD score (P < 0.0001). Risk factors of HCV patients receiving advanced aged grafts included donation after cardiac death (DCD, HR: 1.69) and recent hospitalization (HR: 1.43). Advanced aged grafts showed significant difference in graft survival of HCV patients with stratification of DRI and OPI. In conclusion, there was no offsetting effect by use of advanced aged grafts into younger or low MELD patients. Advanced aged grafts, especially DCD, should be judiciously used for HCV patients with low MELD score.     

Donor Factors Predicting Recipient Survival After Liver Retransplantation: The Retransplant Donor Risk Index

The use of extended criteria liver donors (ECD) is controversial, especially in the setting of retransplantation. The aims of this study are to investigate the effects of ECD grafts on retransplantation and to develop a predictive mortality index in liver retransplantation based on the previously established donor risk index. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) liver transplant dataset was analyzed for all adult, non-status 1, liver retransplantations occurring in the United States since February 2002. All donors were categorized for multiple characteristics of ECD, and using multivariate survival models a retransplant donor risk index (ReTxDRI) was developed. A total of 1327 retransplants were analyzed. There were 611 (46%) recipients who received livers with at least one ECD criterion. The use of ECD grafts in recipients with HCV did not incur worse survival than the non-ECD grafts. The addition of the cause of recipient graft failure to the donor risk index formed the ReTxDRI. After adjusting for multiple recipient factors, the ReTxDRI was predictive of overall recipient survival and was a strongly independent predictor of death after retransplantation (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.89–3.27, p < 0.0001). The use of the ReTxDRI can improve recipient and donor matching and help to optimize posttransplant survival in liver retransplantation.     

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

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

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.     

Liver transplantation from old donors into HCV and non-HCV recipients

BACKGROUND: Chronic liver failure due to HCV-related cirrhosis is the leading indication for liver transplantation in Western countries. Inferior long-term results have been reported for liver transplantation in HCV patients, especially when marginal donor livers are utilized. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze the outcome of liver transplantation from elderly donors in HCV versus non-HCV recipients. METHODS: One hundred seventy-nine patients receiving 204 liver transplantations were divided into four groups according to HCV positivity and donor age (> or <65 years). Long-term survivals were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Grafts from donors of >65 years into HCV-positive patients displayed lower patient and graft survival rates than HCV-negative cases, although macrosteatosis was more frequent (55% vs 9%, P =.02) among organs used for non-HCV cases. Moreover, HCV-positive recipients transplanted with a donor aged >65 years had significantly lower patient and graft survival (40% vs 78% [P =.01] and 40% vs 68% [P =.06], respectively) than patients receiving a liver from a younger donor. CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective analysis, although hampered by a small number of patients transplanted with an old liver, suggest that the results of liver transplantation with a donor graft >65 years of age into an HCV-positive recipient shows a worse outcome than those from younger donors. Older livers should be reserved for non-HCV cases.     

Elderly recipients of hepatitis C positive renal allografts can quickly develop liver disease

Our institution explored using allografts from donors with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) for elderly renal transplantation (RT). Thirteen HCV- elderly recipients were transplanted with HCV+ allografts (eD+/R-) between January 2003 and April 2009. Ninety HCV- elderly recipients of HCV- allografts (eD-/R-), eight HCV+ recipients of HCV+ allografts (D+/R+) and thirteen HCV+ recipients of HCV- allografts (D-/R+) were also transplanted. Median follow-up was 1.5 (range 0.8-5) years. Seven eD+/R- developed a positive HCV viral load and six had elevated liver transaminases with evidence of hepatitis on biopsy. Overall, eD+/R- survival was 46% while the eD-/R- survival was 85% (P = 0.003). Seven eD+/R- died during follow-up. Causes included multi-organ failure and sepsis (n = 4), cancer (n = 1), failure-to-thrive (n = 1) and surgical complications (n = 1). One eD+/R- died from causes directly related to HCV infection. In conclusion, multiple eD+/R- quickly developed HCV-related liver disease and infections were a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality.     

A 10-year experience of liver transplantation for hepatitis C: analysis of factors determining outcome in over 500 patients

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors affecting the outcome of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for end-stage liver disease caused by hepatitis C virus (HCV) and to identify models that predict patient and graft survival. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The national epidemic of HCV infection has become the leading cause of hepatic failure that requires OLT. Rapidly increasing demands for OLT and depleted donor organ pools mandate appropriate selection of patients and donors. Such selection should be guided by a better understanding of the factors that influence the outcome of OLT. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of 510 patients who underwent OLT for HCV during the past decade. Seven donor, 10 recipient, and 2 operative variables that may affect outcome were dichotomized at the median for univariate screening. Factors that achieved a probability value less than 0.2 or that were thought to be relevant were entered into a stepdown Cox proportional hazard regression model. RESULTS: Overall patient and graft survival rates at 1, 5, and 10 years were 84%, 68%, and 60% and 73%, 56%, and 49%, respectively. Overall median time to HCV recurrence was 34 months after transplantation. Neither HCV recurrence nor HCV-positive donor status significantly decreased patient and graft survival rates by Kaplan-Meier analysis. However, use of HCV-positive donors reduced the median time of recurrence to 22.9 months compared with 35.7 months after transplantation of HCV-negative livers. Stratification of patients into five subgroups, based on time of recurrence, revealed that early HCV recurrence was associated with significantly increased rates of patient death and graft loss. Donor, recipient, and operative variables that may affect OLT outcome were analyzed. On univariate analysis, recipient age, serum creatinine, donor length of hospital stay, donor female gender, United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status of recipient, and presence of hepatocellular cancer affected the outcome of OLT. Elevation of pretransplant HCV RNA was associated with an increased risk of graft loss. Of 15 variables considered by multivariate Cox regression analysis, recipient age, UNOS status, donor gender, and log creatinine were simultaneous significant predictors for patient survival. Simultaneously significant factors for graft failure included log creatinine, log alanine transaminase, log aspartate transaminase, UNOS status, donor gender, and warm ischemia time. These variables were therefore entered into prognostic models for patient and graft survival. CONCLUSION: The earlier the recurrence of HCV, the greater the impact on patient and graft survival. The use of HCV-positive donors may accelerate HCV recurrence, and they should be used judiciously. Patient survival at the time of transplantation is predicted by donor gender, UNOS status, serum creatinine, and recipient age. Graft survival is affected by donor gender, warm ischemia time, and pretransplant patient condition. The authors' current survival prognostic models require further multicenter validation.     

Pretransplant model to predict posttransplant survival in liver transplant patients

OBJECTIVE: To develop a prognostic model that determines patient survival outcomes after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) using readily available pretransplant variables. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The current liver organ allocation system strongly favors organ distribution to critically ill recipients who exhibit poor survival outcomes following OLT. A severely limited organ resource, increasing waiting list deaths, and rising numbers of critically ill recipients mandate an organ allocation system that balances disease severity with survival outcomes. Such goals can be realized only through the development of prognostic models that predict survival following OLT. METHODS: Variables that may affect patient survival following OLT were analyzed in hepatitis C (HCV) recipients at the authors' center, since HCV is the most common indication for OLT. The resulting patient survival model was examined and refined in HCV and non-HCV patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. Kaplan-Meier methods, univariate comparisons, and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression were employed for analyses. RESULTS: Variables identified by multivariate analysis as independent predictors for patient survival following primary transplantation of adult HCV recipients in the last 10 years at the authors' center were entered into a prognostic survival model to predict patient survival. Accordingly, mortality was predicted by 0.0293 (recipient age) + 1.085 (log10 recipient creatinine) + 0.289 (donor female gender) + 0.675 urgent UNOS - 1.612 (log10 recipient creatinine times urgent UNOS). The above variables, in addition to donor age, total bilirubin, prothrombin time (PT), retransplantation, and warm and cold ischemia times, were applied to the UNOS database. Of the 46,942 patients transplanted over the last 10 years, 25,772 patients had complete data sets. An eight-factor model that accurately predicted survival was derived. Accordingly, the mortality index posttransplantation = 0.0084 donor age + 0.019 recipient age + 0.816 log creatinine + 0.0044 warm ischemia (in minutes) + 0.659 (if second transplant) + 0.10 log bilirubin + 0.0087 PT + 0.01 cold ischemia (in hours). Thus, this model is applicable to first or second liver transplants. Patient survival rates based on model-predicted risk scores for death and observed posttransplant survival rates were similar. Additionally, the model accurately predicted survival outcomes for HCV and non-HCV patients. CONCLUSIONS: Posttransplant patient survival can be accurately predicted based on eight straightforward factors. The balanced application of a model for liver transplant survival estimate, in addition to disease severity, as estimated by the model for end-stage liver disease, would markedly improve survival outcomes and maximize patients' benefits following OLT.     

Risk Factors for Graft Survival After Liver Transplantation from Donation After Cardiac Death Donors: An Analysis of OPTN/UNOS Data

Due to increasing use of allografts from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors, we evaluated DCD liver transplants and impact of recipient and donor factors on graft survival. Liver transplants from DCD donors reported to UNOS were analyzed against donation after brain death (DBD) donor liver transplants performed between 1996 and 2003. We defined a recipient cumulative relative risk (RCRR) using significant risk factors identified from a Cox regression analysis: age; medical condition at transplantation; regraft status; dialysis received and serum creatinine. Graft survival from DCD donors (71% at 1 year and 60% at 3 years) were significantly inferior to DBD donors (80% at 1 year and 72% at 3 years, p < 0.001). Low-risk recipients (RCRR < or = 1.5) with low-risk DCD livers (DWIT < 30 min and CIT < 10 h, n = 226) achieved graft survival rates (81% and 67% at 1 and 3 years, respectively) not significantly different from recipients with DBD allografts (80% and 72% at 1 and 3 years, respectively, log-rank p = 0.23). Liver allografts from DCD donors may be used to increase the cadaveric donor pool, with favorable graft survival rates achieved when low-risk grafts are transplanted in a low-risk setting. Whether transplantation of these organs in low-risk recipients provides a survival benefit compared to the waiting list is unknown.     

Kidneys from Deceased Donors: Maximizing the Value of a Scarce Resource

Donor age is a significant risk factor for graft loss after kidney transplantation. We investigated the question whether significant graft years were being lost through transplantation of younger donor kidneys into older recipients with potentially shorter lifespans than the organs they receive. We examined patient and graft survival for deceased donor kidney transplants performed in the United States between the years 1990 and 2002 by Kaplan-Meier plots. We categorized the distribution of deceased donor kidneys by donor and recipient age. Subsequently, we calculated the actual and projected graft survival of transplanted kidneys from younger donors with the patient survival of transplant recipients of varying ages. Over the study period, 16.4% (9250) transplants from donors aged 15-50 were transplanted to recipients over the age of 60. At the same time, 73.6% of donors above the age of 50 were allocated to recipients under the age of 60. The graft survival of grafts from younger donors significantly exceeded the patient survival of recipients over the age of 60. The overall projected improvement in graft survival, by excluding transplantation of younger kidneys to older recipients, was approximately 3 years per transplant. Avoiding the allocation of young donor kidneys to elderly recipients, could have significantly increased the overall graft life, by a total 27,500 graft years, between 1990 and 2002, with projected cost savings of about 1.5 billion dollars.     

Prediction of 6-month survival after liver transplantation using Cox regression

BACKGROUND: The outcome of liver transplantation (LTx) has been correlated with several donor and recipient factors. METHODS: A database of 191 consecutive LTx cases was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression statistics based on 80 variables. To avoid additional effects of late events on patient survival, the chosen endpoint was 6 months. Data were evaluated using SPSS statistical software. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a difference in 1- to 6-month graft survival between patients transplanted with organs from donors older versus younger than 60 years (Breslow, P <.01). Differences in 1- to 6-month graft survivals were observed between patients listed as UNOS status 3, 2B, 2A, and 1: the outcomes for UNOS status 2B versus UNOS status 2A and UNOS status 2B versus status 1 were significant (P <.05). Differences in 1- to 6-month graft survival rates were found between patients with versus without sepsis (P <.05), and with versus without rejection episodes (P <.01). Cox regression analysis revealed only three of the variables to be independent prognostic predictors of graft failure: donor age; postoperative septic status; and rejection. The best mathematical multivariate Cox regression model linked donor age + donor Na + rejection + sepsis to 1- to 6-month graft survival (chi-square = 29.06, P <.001). CONCLUSION: Factors predictive of 1- to 6-month graft survival after liver transplantation include donor age; UNOS status; sepsis; and rejection.     

Extended criteria for organ acceptance. Strategies for achieving organ safety and for increasing organ pool

The terms extended donor or expanded donor mean changes in donor acceptability criteria. In almost all cases, the negative connotations of these terms cannot be justified. Factors considered to affect donor or organ acceptability have changed with time, after showing that they did not negatively affect graft or patient survival per se or when the adequate measures had been adopted. There is no age limit to be an organ donor. Kidney and liver transplantation from donors older than 65 years can have excellent graft and patient actuarial survival and graft function. Using these donors can be from an epidemiological point of view the most important factor to esablish the final number of cadaveric liver and kidney transplantations. Organs with broad structural parenchyma lesion with preserved functional reserve and organs with reversible functional impairment can be safely transplanted. Bacterial and fungal donor infection with the adequate antibiotic treatment of donor and/or recipient prevents infection in the latter. The organs, including the liver, from donors with infection by the hepatitis B and C viruses can be safely transplanted to recipients with infection by the same viruses, respectively. Poisoned donors and non-heart-beating donors, grafts from transplant recipients, reuse of grafts, domino transplant and splitting of one liver for two recipients can be an important and safe source of organs for transplantation.     

The mismatch choice in liver transplantation: a suggestion for the selection of the recipient in relation to the characteristics of the donor

Two hundred seventy-six liver transplants were retrospectively reviewed to analyze 6-month graft survival in relation to the combination of donor quality (standard donor vs nonstandard donor) and risk related to the severity of recipient liver disease low-risk, ie, United Network for Organ Sharing [UNOS] status 3/2b; high-risk, ie, UNOS status 1/2a). The overall 6-month survival rate of 82% was stratified into 4 classes: (1) standard donor to low-risk recipient = 88%; (2) standard donor to high-risk recipient = 86%; (3) nonstandard donor to low-risk recipient = 84%; and (4) nonstandard donor to high-risk recipient = 67%. According to the observed graft survival in the 4 different classes, 2 simulations were performed: the "match simulation" (transplantation of all low-risk recipients using standard donors, and transplantation of all high-risk recipients using nonstandard donors), and the "mismatch simulation" (transplantation of all the high-risk patients using low-risk donors and transplantation of low-risk patients using high-risk donors). The 6-month survival rates, calculated using the match simulation, were 74% and using the mismatch simulation, 84%. The authors suggest that, in the era of marginal donors, the recipient should be selected in relation to the characteristics of the donor according to the mismatch model.     

Influence of pretransplant pregnancy on survival of renal allografts from living donors

BACKGROUND: The presence of a small number of cells of donor origin in organ transplant recipients (microchimerism) may influence allograft survival and may induce tolerance. Postpartum women may be microchimeric to offspring hematopoietic cells up to 27 years. We hypothesized that mothers receiving renal allografts from offspring would have better graft survival compared with either fathers receiving allografts from offspring, or mothers receiving allografts from nonoffspring donors. METHODS: We analyzed 1803 living related kidney transplants from the UNOS database performed between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 1995, for mothers and fathers who received grafts from offspring with one haplotype match. We also compared these mothers with parous females receiving a kidney from nonoffspring donors (spouse and other biologically related or unrelated family members). A multivariate logistic regression method was used to analyze the effect of donor type, as well as other recipient, donor, and transplant characteristics, on graft and patient survival. RESULTS: Mothers receiving one haplotype-matched offspring renal allografts did not have better graft survival at 1 or 3 years posttransplant compared with fathers receiving similar grafts. There was also no difference in graft or patient survival between mothers receiving kidney grafts from either offspring or nonoffspring donors. Graft survival in mothers with multiple pregnancies was poorer than those with a single pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible that persistent microchimerism of fetal cells in maternal circulation may, for some mothers, cause a detectable improvement in graft or patient survival. Comparison of female and male recipients from the UNOS database did not reveal any differences in outcomes. If mothers are tolerant to their offspring, our results indicate that this microchimerism may not improve renal allograft or patient survival in offspring donor to maternal recipient combinations. Lastly, more sensitive pretransplant cross-match assays may need to be implemented in multiparous women, given our results.     

One hundred in situ split-liver transplantations: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of graft and recipient survival from a single-institution series of in situ split-liver transplantations and compare outcomes to living donor and whole organs for adults and children. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Split-liver transplantation is a surgical technique that creates 2 allografts from a single cadaver donor. We have applied split-liver transplantation to all indications and categories of medical urgency for initial as well as retransplantation to expand the current donor pool and decrease reliance upon living donation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 100 consecutive in situ split-liver transplantations yielding a left lateral segment and right trisegment graft that were performed at the University of California Los Angeles between 9/91 and 02/03. These 100 transplantations generated 190 allografts for transplantation into 105 children and 60 adults, with the sharing of 25 allografts among transplant centers across the United States. Outcomes and incidence of complications were compared with living donor and whole organ recipients receiving liver transplantation during the same time period with independent predictors of split-liver graft and recipient survival identified by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The incidence of biliary and vascular complications observed in recipients of left lateral segment grafts created by split-liver transplantation was not statistically different from recipients of left lateral segment grafts created from living donation or children receiving whole-organ grafts from pediatric donors. Kaplan-Meier survival estimations of left lateral segment graft and recipient survival also demonstrated no statistical difference among split-liver, living donor, and whole-organ recipients. Right trisegment grafts from split-liver transplantation demonstrated a 10% incidence of biliary and 7% incidence of vascular complications. Long-term graft function was excellent with patient and graft survival equal to 1086 recipients of cadaver whole-organ grafts from donors ages 10-40 years who underwent transplant operations during the same time period. Predictors of split-liver transplantation graft and recipient survival included United Network for Organ Sharing status at transplantation, indication, occurrence of a complication, donor creatinine, and donor length of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Split-liver transplantation is an effective mechanism for immediate expansion of the cadaver donor pool that can reduce dependence upon living donation in adults and children.     

Application of pediatric donors in split liver transplantation: Is there an age limit?

The experience of using pediatric donors in split liver transplant is exceedingly rare. We aim to investigate the outcomes of recipients receiving split pediatric grafts. Sixteen pediatric recipients receiving split liver grafts from 8 pediatric donors < 7 years were enrolled. The donor and recipient characteristics, perioperative course, postoperative complications, and graft and recipient survival rates were evaluated. The mean follow‐up time was 8.0 ± 2.3 months. The graft and recipient survival rates were 100%. The liver function remained in the normal range at the end of the follow‐up time in all recipients. No life‐threatening complications were seen in these recipients, and the only surgery‐related complication was portal vein stenosis in 1 recipient. Cytomegalovirus infection was the most common complication (62.5%). The transaminase level was significant higher in extended right lobe recipients in the early postoperative days, but the difference vanished at the end of first week; postoperative complications and graft and recipient survival rates did not differ between left and right graft recipients. Notably, the youngest split donor graft (2.7 years old) was associated with ideal recipient outcomes. Split liver transplant using well‐selected pediatric donors is a promising strategy to expand pediatric donor source in well‐matched recipients.