Search

Donor Risk Index (DRI) has been introduced to predict post-transplant graft survival (GS) using donor data. The MELD score, which is the gold-standard in scoring liver disease in liver transplant candidates, has a low prognostic significance. The present analysis is aimed to assess the role of DRI and of MELD score in predicting the outcome after liver transplantation, in short (180 days) and medium term (1460 days). The Organ Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) database relevant to 23.392 consecutive cases in the MELD era was used. Cases were stratified in classes according to DRI (4 classes), MELD (6 classes), and DRI-MELD match (24 classes). GS was assessed by Kaplan Meier method at 0-1460 days. Differences were tested by Log-rank test. All three parameters allow an effective stratification. Using the DRI, the gaps between the highest and lowest GS were 7.8% and 14.9%, at 180 and 1460 days, respectively. Using the MELD score, the gaps were 10.2% and 9.5%, respectively. Using DRI-MELD, the gaps were 25.5% and 35.4%, respectively. Both the DRI and the MELD can predict the outcome, although the predictive power of the DRI is the highest of the two, and the predictive power of the donor- recipient match, is even higher.

Key Points Question Can the individual risk estimation for early allograft failure (EAF) be improved in view of liver retransplant? Findings In this multicenter cohort study investigating the association between donor-recipient factors and EAF, a novel Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation (EASE) score was developed. The score includes Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, transfused packed red blood cells, and hepatic vessel early thrombosis as well as transaminases, platelet, and bilirubin kinetics as variables on day 10 after transplant. The EASE score outperformed previous model scores, estimating EAF risk with 87% accuracy on day 90 after transplant; EASE was developed on a multicenter Italian database (1609 recipients) and validated on an external UK database (538 recipients). Meaning In this study, the EASE score rated the EAF risk (0%-100%) and identified cases at unsustainable risk to be listed for retransplant., Importance Expansion of donor acceptance criteria for liver transplant increased the risk for early allograft failure (EAF), and although EAF prediction is pivotal to optimize transplant outcomes, there is no consensus on specific EAF indicators or timing to evaluate EAF. Recently, the Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplantation (L-GrAFT) algorithm, based on aspartate transaminase, bilirubin, platelet, and international normalized ratio kinetics, was developed from a single-center database gathered from 2002 to 2015. Objective To develop and validate a simplified comprehensive model estimating at day 10 after liver transplant the EAF risk at day 90 (the Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation [EASE] score) and, secondarily, to identify early those patients with unsustainable EAF risk who are suitable for retransplant. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter cohort study was designed to develop a score capturing a continuum from normal graft function to nonfunction after transplant. Both parenchymal and vascular factors, which provide an indication to list for retransplant, were included among the EAF determinants. The L-GrAFT kinetic approach was adopted and modified with fewer data entries and novel variables. The population included 1609 patients in Italy for the derivation set and 538 patients in the UK for the validation set; all were patients who underwent transplant in 2016 and 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures Early allograft failure was defined as graft failure (codified by retransplant or death) for any reason within 90 days after transplant. Results At day 90 after transplant, the incidence of EAF was 110 of 1609 patients (6.8%) in the derivation set and 41 of 538 patients (7.6%) in the external validation set. Median (interquartile range) ages were 57 (51-62) years in the derivation data set and 56 (49-62) years in the validation data set. The EASE score was developed through 17 entries derived from 8 variables, including the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, blood transfusion, early thrombosis of hepatic vessels, and kinetic parameters of transaminases, platelet count, and bilirubin. Donor parameters (age, donation after cardiac death, and machine perfusion) were not associated with EAF risk. Results were adjusted for transplant center volume. In receiver operating characteristic curve analyses, the EASE score outperformed L-GrAFT, Model for Early Allograft Function, Early Allograft Dysfunction, Eurotransplant Donor Risk Index, donor age × Model for End-stage Liver Disease, and Donor Risk Index scores, estimating day 90 EAF in 87% (95% CI, 83%-91%) of cases in both the derivation data set and the internal validation data set. Patients could be stratified in 5 classes, with those in the highest class exhibiting unsustainable EAF risk. Conclusions and Relevance This study found that the developed EASE score reliably estimated EAF risk. Knowledge of contributing factors may help clinicians to mitigate risk factors and guide them through the challenging clinical decision to allocate patients to early liver retransplant. The EASE score may be used in translational research across transplant centers., This multicenter cohort study develops and validates a simplified comprehensive model that estimates on day 10 after liver transplant the risk of early allograft failure with 90 days among patients who undergo liver transplant.

Optimization of donor-recipient match is one of the exciting challenges in liver transplantation. Using algorithms obtained by the Italian D-MELD study (5256 liver transplants, 21 Centers, 2002-2009 period), a web-based survival calculator was developed. The calculator is available online at the URL http://www.D-MELD.com. The access is free. Registration and authentication are required. The website was developed using PHP scripting language on HTML platform and it is hosted by the web provider Aruba.it. For a given donor (expressed by donor age) and for three potential recipients (expressed by values of bilirubin, creatinine, INR, and by recipient age, HCV, HBV, portal thrombosis, re-transplant status), the website calculates the patient survival at 90days, 1year, 3years, and allows the identification of possible unsustainable matches (i.e. donor-recipient matches with predicted patient survival less than 50% at 5 years). This innovative approach allows the selection of the best recipient for each referred donor, avoiding the allocation of a high-risk graft to a high-risk recipient. The use of the D-MELD.com website can help transplant surgeons, hepatologists, and transplant coordinators in everyday practice of matching donors and recipients, by selecting the more appropriate recipient among various candidates with different prognostic factors.

Donor-recipient match is a matter of debate in liver transplantation. D-MELD (donor age × recipient biochemical model for end-stage liver disease [MELD]) and other factors were analyzed on a national Italian database recording 5946 liver transplants. Primary endpoint was to determine factors predictive of 3-year patient survival. D-MELD cutoff predictive of 5-year patient survival 1628). At 3 years, the odds ratio (OR) for death was 2.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-2.85) in D-MELD class C versus B. The OR was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.24-0.66) in class A versus class B. Other predictors were hepatitis C virus (HCV; OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11-1.81), hepatitis B virus (HBV; OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.93), retransplant (OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.16-2.87) and low-volume center (OR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.11-1.99). Cox regressions up to 90 months confirmed results. The hazard ratio was 1.97 (95% CI, 1.59-2.43) for D-MELD class C versus class B and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.29-0.60) for D-MELD class A versus class B. Recipient age, HCV, HBV and retransplant were also significant. The 5yrsPS