Search

Background: Paucity of deceased donor livers has resulted in a 10-fold rise in living donor liver transplantations (LDLTs) performed in India over the past decade. Nonetheless, number of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) performed has improved with the establishment of simplified legal framework for certification of brain death and organ donation. In this study, we present our outcomes of DDLT performed at various centers, comparing their outcomes and provide a snapshot of the increasing number of DDLT across the state over the years., Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent liver transplants from January 2010 till December 2019 by our transplant team in the state of Tamil Nadu, India, were included in the study. The program was established initially at the primary hospital in the year 2010 and with the evolution of the initial experience, transplant programs were expanded to the others hospital from the year 2015. Preoperative clinical data, intraoperative characteristics, and posttransplant outcomes of DDLT were analyzed from our prospective database., Results: A total of 362 DDLTs (331 adults, 31 children) were performed at 11 centers. Median (range) model for end-stage liver disease score was 16 (6-39). Forty-eight split, 11 combined liver kidney, and 4 auxiliary DDLTs were performed. One-, 3-, and 5-y survival was 87.2%, 80.4%, and 76.6% in adults and 80.6%, 80.6%, and 80.6% in children, respectively., Conclusions: In a country where over 80% of the LTs are performed as LDLT, we provide the first report of a heartening trend of increasing number of DDLT programs being established with excellent 5-y outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is a well-recognized complication following liver transplantation (LT), with up to 20% developing this following living donor LT (LDLT). Preventing SFSS involves consideration of factors before the surgical procedure, including donor and recipient selection, and factors during the surgical procedure, including adequate outflow reconstruction, graft portal inflow modulation, and management of portosystemic shunts. International Liver Transplantation Society, International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group, and Liver Transplant Society of India Consensus Conference was convened in January 2023 to develop recommendations for the prediction and management of SFSS in LDLT. The format of the conference was based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. International experts in this field were allocated to 4 working groups (diagnosis, prevention, anesthesia, and critical care considerations, and management of established SFSS). The working groups prepared evidence-based recommendations to answer-specific questions considering the currently available literature. The working group members, independent panel, and conference attendees served as jury to edit and confirm the final recommendations presented at the end of the conference by each working group separately. This report presents the final statements and evidence-based recommendations provided by working group 2 that can be implemented to prevent SFSS in LDLT patients., Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest, (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Therapeutic plasma exchange has been reported to be useful in the management of acute liver failure and acute-on-chronic liver failure. This retrospective study evaluated therapeutic plasma exchange as an adjunct to standard supportive care for early allograft dysfunction after living donor liver transplant., Materials and Methods: All consecutive adult living donor liver transplants performed from January 2015 to February 2019 were included. Patients treated without or with therapeutic plasma exchange for early allograft dysfunction (Olthoff criteria) were compared., Results: There were 465 adult transplant recipients, and 67 (14.4%) had early allograft dysfunction, of which 43 (64%) had therapeutic plasma exchange and 24 (36%) did not. Fourteen patients were excluded, as they had both preoperative and immediate postoperative therapeutic plasma exchange (5 patients with acute liver failure and 9 with acute-on-chronic liver failure). The therapeutic plasma exchange group (n = 29) had more preoperative acute kidney injury (55.2% vs 25.0%; P = .009), lower graft-recipient weight ratio (0.96 vs 1.09; P = .043), and slightly higher final portal pressure (11 vs 10 mg/dL; P = .027). Therapeutic plasma exchange was started at a median of postoperative day 9, with median serum bilirubin of 13.6 mg/dL and a median of 3 sessions per patient. There was no 90-day mortality in the group without therapeutic plasma exchange; however, in the therapeutic plasma exchange group, 13 patients (45%) died (P < .001). Patients who received therapeutic plasma exchange had more septic complications (62.1% vs 12.5%; P < .001) and needed more postoperative renal replacement therapy (51.7% vs 8.3%; P < .001)., Conclusions: This is the first study to compare patients treated with or without therapeutic plasma exchange for early allograft dysfunction in the living donor liver transplant setting. Within the limitations of this retrospective study, we were unable to confirm whether therapeutic plasma exchange could increase early mortality.

The impact of increasing recipient age on morbidity and mortality following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains controversial. The study aims to analyze the impact of recipient age on outcomes following LDLT. Data on adult LDLTs performed between November 2009 and February 2020 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on recipient age: 18 to 65 years (younger adults) and >65 years (older adults). Propensity score matching (PSM) using nearest-neighbor matching was used to match each older recipient with up to 2 younger adult recipients using multiple preoperative parameters. Outcomes evaluated were duration of ventilation, need for reintubation, tracheostomy, intensive care unit (ICU) readmission, length of ICU and hospital stays, postoperative complications, reoperation within 90 days, and patient survival. A total of 801 adult LDLT recipients were included in the study; 751 (93.7%) were younger adults, and 50 (6.3%) were older adults. Older recipients were more likely to be diabetic (60.0% versus 39.7%) and hypertensive (44.0% versus 20.4%) with preexisting cardiac disease (28.0% versus 11.2%). However, their pretransplant Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was significantly lower (14.5 versus 17.7), and they were more likely to receive a transplant because of hepatocellular carcinoma (38.0% versus 17.7%). Older recipients had longer durations of ventilation after LT both before (3.7 versus 1.9 days) and after PSM (4.0 versus 1.5 days). After PSM, the 30-day (13.0% versus 2.4%), 90-day (15.2% and 2.4%), and overall mortality rates (21.7% versus 7.1%) were significantly higher for older recipients when compared with younger recipients. There was no difference between the younger and older recipients with respect to other postoperative outcomes. This propensity score-matched study shows that the older LDLT recipients have higher 30-day, 90-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality rates when compared with matched younger counterparts., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Survival following liver transplantation has changed dramatically owing to improvement in surgical techniques, peri-operative care and optimal immunosuppressive therapy. Post-Liver transplant (LT) de novo or recurrent viral infection continues to cause major allograft dysfunction, leading to poor graft and patient survival in untreated patients. Availability of highly effective antiviral drugs has significantly improved post-LT survival. Patients transplanted for chronic hepatitis B infection should receive life-long nucleos(t)ide analogues, with or without HBIg for effective viral control. Patients with chronic hepatitis C should be commenced on directly acting antiviral (DAA) drugs prior to transplantation. DAA therapy for post-LT recurrent hepatitis C infection is associated with close to 100% sustained virological response (SVR), irrespective of genotype. De novo chronic Hepatitis E infection is an increasingly recognised cause of allograft dysfunction in LT recipients. Untreated chronic HEV infection of the graft may lead to liver fibrosis and allograft failure. CMV and EBV can reactivate leading to systemic illness following liver transplantation. With COVID-19 pandemic, post-transplant patients are at risk of SARS-Co-V2 infection. Majority of the LT recipients require hospitalization, and the mortality in this population is around 20%. Early recognition of allograft dysfunction and identification of viral aetiology is essential in the management of post-LT de novo or recurrent infections. Optimising immunosuppression is an important step in reducing the severity of allograft damage in the treatment of post-transplant viral infections. Viral clearance or control can be achieved by early initiation of high potency antiviral therapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Recurrent HCV infection (rHCV) of the liver allograft following transplantation is universal and is associated with poor graft and patient survival in comparison with other indications. Treatment of rHCV infection in the previous era with pegylated interferon and ribavirin was associated with low sustained virological response (SVR) due to poor tolerability, adverse events and graft rejection. Recently, directly acting antiviral drugs (DAA) have been approved for the treatment of hepatitis C infection and a number of clinical trials have been conducted across various centers in the management of rHCV infection of the graft. In this review we discuss about recent studies that have emerged on the use of NS5b polymerase inhibitor, sofosbuvir in combination with second generation protease inhibitor, simeprevir, fixed dose ledipasvir or daclatasvir with or without ribavirin in the treatment of post transplant rHCV infection.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has become the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States and Europe. Recurrence of HCV is universal in all liver graft recipients, but the natural history of the disease is variable with some patients displaying slowly progressive liver injury, while approximately 30% become cirrhotic within five yr of surgery. Currently, liver biopsy is the reference standard to assess liver injury in the post-transplant setting. But biopsy is associated with complications such as bleeding and pain, as well as the risk of sampling error and discordance in reporting between histopathologists. Thus, as in the pre-transplant setting, there is increasing attention being drawn to the use of non-invasive tests of liver fibrosis. This review examines the role of non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis in the post-transplant setting including simple tests such as aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index, the Benlloch formula, London Transplant Centre score, and finally transient elastography. The authors assess the respective advantages and disadvantages of the tests and consider how non-invasive tests of liver fibrosis can be utilized in the future management of post-transplant HCV infection., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

COVID-19 pandemic has strained several healthcare resources across the world. While liver transplantation (LT) is the only curative therapy for patients with end-stage liver disease, we aimed to determine the clinical outcome of patients waitlisted for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) during COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective comparative observational study of adult patients waitlisted for DDLT from January 2019 to January 2022 at our liver unit (Dr Rela Institute and Medical Center, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India) was carried out. Patient demographics, disease etiology, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease – Sodium (MELD-Na) score were calculated for all patients listed during the study period. Clinical event was defined as number of DDLT, death in the absence of transplant, and patients awaiting LT were compared. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS V24.0. In total, 310 patients were waitlisted for DDLT, of whom 148, 63, and 99 patients listed during 2019, 2020, and 2021 (till January 2022), respectively; 22 (53.6%), 10 (24.3%), and 9 (21.9%) patients underwent DDLT in the year 2019, 2020, and 2021 (P = 0.000); 137 patients (44.19%) died on the DDLT waitlist of whom 41 (29.9%), 67 (48.9%), and 29 (21.1%) in the year 2019, 2020, and 2021 (P = 0.000), respectively. Waitlist mortality was significantly higher during the COVID first wave. COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted patients waitlisted for DDLT in India. With limited access to healthcare facilities and decreased organ donation rates during the pandemic, there was a considerable reduction in the patients waitlisted for DDLT, lesser number of patients underwent DDLT, and higher waitlist mortality during the pandemic year. Efforts to improve organ donation in India should be strongly implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, there has been a considerable increase in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Availability of high-efficacy drugs for hepatitis B and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection may have changed the disease prevalence. We aimed to study the impact of this changing epidemiology in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) over a 10-year period. The study population was stratified into Period 1 (2009–2014) and Period 2 (2015–2019). Demographics, indications for LT and changes in the epidemiology between two periods were analysed. Aetiology-based posttransplant survival analysis was carried out. Indication for LT among 1017 adult patients (277 in Period 1 and 740 in Period 2) showed a significant increase in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH; 85 [30.7%] and 311 [42%]; P = 0.001), decrease in hepatitis C (49 [17.7%] and 75 [10.1%]; P = 0.002), and increase in hepatocellular carcinoma from Period 1 to Period 2 (13 [26.5%] to 38 [50.7%]; P = 0.009) among HCV patients. Patients transplanted for NASH had a lower 5-year survival compared with viral hepatitis (75.9% vs 87.4%; P = 0.03). There was a strong association between coronary artery disease and NASH (hazard ratio = 1.963, 95% confidence interval, 1.19–3.22). NASH is the leading indication for liver transplantation in India, surpassing viral hepatitis in recent years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) patients undergoing liver transplant (LT) surgery are often multiply alloimmunized and pose significant challenges to the transfusion services in terms of red cell cross-match incompatibility, unpredictable blood requirements, and often lead to significant delays in availing compatible red cell units. We report a case of a 64-year-old female from Bahrain, a known case of hepatitis C-related ESLD referred for LT surgery. She had a history of multiple uneventful transfusions in the preceding year. Her blood group was A-positive, direct antiglobulin test, and cold antibodies were negative. Indirect antiglobulin test was positive, and antibody identification confirmed the presence of anti-C, anti-e, and anti-K. Her red cell phenotype was R2R2and Kell negative (C-c+E+e-K-). The patient was started on erythropoietin. Requests for R2R2and Kell negative units were sent to various blood banks across the country. After >800 A/O group units phenotyping and a waiting period of 6 weeks, two compatible R2R2phenotypes and Kell negative could be arranged in-house and three units were received from Gurgaon, North India. Intraoperative management included blood preservation techniques including cell salvage, antifibrinolytic drug, and monitoring using thromboelastography. The estimated blood loss was 350 ml with pre- and postoperative Hb 10.4 gm% and 9.2 gm%, respectively. She received intraoperatively two units of single-donor platelet and four units of fresh frozen plasma and postoperatively one unit of leukocyte-depleted-packed red cells and doing well at 12-month follow-up. This case highlights the importance of advance immunohematology for timely detection of alloimmunization and providing antigen-negative compatible units, proper communication between the transfusion specialists, and the clinical team for proper patient blood management as well as the need for central rare donor registry program to avoid delays in providing compatible blood in such inevitable cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although liver involvement has been observed in over two-third cases of dengue viral infection, less than 1% cases progress to dengue-related acute liver failure (D-ALF). Various aspects of management of this disease remain debated including the need and timing of liver transplantation (LT). Moreover, the outcomes of LT for D-ALF have been suboptimal. We present four contrasting cases of D-ALF, two managed with LT and the other two conservatively to highlight the management dilemmas concerning LT in D-ALF. Based on our 4 cases, we would consider dengue shock syndrome, multisystem involvement and neurological deficit not completely accounted for by the ALF as potential contraindications for LT. These would need to be revisited on a case-to-case basis till larger studies define objective selection criteria for LT in D-ALF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute liver failure caused by the ingestion of yellow phosphorus–containing rodenticide has been increasing in incidence over the last decade and is a common indication for emergency liver transplantation in Southern and Western India and other countries. Clear guidelines for its management are necessary, given its unpredictable course, potential for rapid deterioration and variation in clinical practice. A modified Delphi approach was used for developing consensus guidelines under the aegis of the Liver Transplantation Society of India. A detailed review of the published literature was performed. Recommendations for three areas of clinical practice, assessment and initial management, intensive care unit (ICU) management and liver transplantation, were developed. The expert panel consisted of 16 clinicians, 3 nonclinical specialists and 5 senior advisory members from 11 centres. Thirty-one recommendations with regard to criteria for hospital admission and discharge, role of medical therapies, ICU management, evidence for extracorporeal therapies such as renal replacement therapy and therapeutic plasma exchange, early predictors of need for liver transplantation and perioperative care were developed based on published evidence and combined clinical experience. Development of these guidelines should help standardise care for patients with yellow phosphorus poisoning and identify areas for collaborative research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus is spreading rapidly, and there are obvious concerns for the immunocompromised patient population including transplant recipients. Creating awareness and understanding patient concerns will play an important role in protecting this vulnerable group in developing timely and appropriate healthcare interventions. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between 23rd March 2020 and 1st April 2020 among 154 liver transplant recipients, transplanted between October 2018 and February 2020. An 18-point questionnaire explored their knowledge of COVID-19, awareness of recipient's high-risk status, interventions to minimize cross-infections, and concerns of this patient group regarding the pandemic. There were 112 (73%) respondents, with median age of 53 years (81% males). There was no difference in demographics between those who responded (n = 112) and those who did not respond to the survey (n = 42). Most of the recipients were aware of the main symptoms of COVID-19, such as fever (92%), breathlessness (86%), and dry cough (87%), but less than half were aware of diarrhea (39%) as a symptom. Awareness about spread from asymptomatic individuals was limited (26%). Majority (95%) understood their high-risk status, but worryingly, 23% of the respondents felt that there was no risk in visiting the hospital for routine clinic visit and blood tests. Concerns were raised by the recipients mostly regarding the uncertainties of COVID-19 infection and its treatment options, the quality of information on social messaging platforms, and lack of access to routine tests/immunosuppression levels because of lockdown/social distancing. Our liver transplant recipients have a reasonable awareness regarding COVID-19. Problems in accessing the healthcare system during prolonged periods of lockdown was a major concern. It is important for each transplant unit to educate, support, and remain accessible to this vulnerable patient cohort as the pandemic continues to progress worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute liver failure (ALF) is not an uncommon complication of a common disease such as acute hepatitis. Viral hepatitis followed by antituberculosis drug–induced hepatotoxicity are the commonest causes of ALF in India. Clinically, such patients present with appearance of jaundice, encephalopathy, and coagulopathy. Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and cerebral edema are central and most important clinical event in the course of ALF, followed by superadded infections, and determine the outcome in these patients. The pathogenesis of encephalopathy and cerebral edema in ALF is unique and multifactorial. Ammonia plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis, and several therapies aim to correct this abnormality. The role of newer ammonia-lowering agents is still evolving. These patients are best managed at a tertiary care hospital with facility for liver transplantation (LT). Aggressive intensive medical management has been documented to salvage a substantial proportion of patients. In those with poor prognostic factors, LT is the only effective therapy that has been shown to improve survival. However, recognizing suitable patients with poor prognosis has remained a challenge. Close monitoring, early identification and treatment of complications, and couseling for transplant form the first-line approach to manage such patients. Recent research shows that use of dynamic prognostic models is better for selecting patients undergoing liver transplantation and timely transplant can save life of patients with ALF with poor prognostic factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Prophylaxis with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleoside analogs can prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplant (LT). Aim To determine the efficacy and cost of maintaining immunoprophylaxis with HBIG and hyperimmune plasma (HIP) for 6 months after LT. Material & methods The study included 22 HBV related LT recipients who were on entecavir and either HBIG or HIP for 6 months. Post transplant HBIG or HIP dose and cost incurred towards prophylaxis were noted. The cost of 200 IU of HBIG at the time of study was Rs 8250/- (US Dollars 135) and that of 2000 IU of HIP was Rs 8000/- (USD 130.7). The loading and maintenance costs at end of 6 months were compared between the two groups. Response to HBIG and HIP was assessed by checking for HBsAg reactivity, anti HBs titer response and HBV DNA viral load. Statistical analysis Median and range, Kruskal Wallis (KW) sign rank Sum Test and Correlation Coefficient (r2) was used for analysis. Results Thirteen recipients received HBIG and 9 recipients HIP. The anti HBs response to HIP was significantly high compared to HBIG (KW Sign rank Sum test P < 0.05); titers remained high until the study period. Between 8 and 30 days, the titer achieved by both HBIG and HIP was similar (KW Sign rank Sum test not significant). Despite low anti HBs titer of <100 IU/L, none of the recipients on HBIG had HBsAg reactivity while 3 on HIP had transient HBsAg positivity. The total cost with HBIG was 13.9 times the cost of HIP. Conclusion HIP immunoprophylaxis in combination with entecavir achieves a high anti HBs titer at a significant low cost during anhepatic and loading phase. HBV reactivation rates with HBIG and HIP is low despite low anti HBs titer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]