Search

Abstract: In recent studies, nonstandard donors and high Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) values have been indicated as risk factors for both graft survival and patient survival. A recent debate concerns which donor and recipient match guarantees the best results in terms of early and late survival. To emphasize the role of the donor–recipient match, we have reported herein a complex case of a patient who changed his preoperative risk status, being transplanted three times using donors of different risk levels. At each transplant, the patient moved to a higher MELD class: first transplant MELD = 22; second transplant MELD = 37; third transplant MELD = 38. Only at the third transplant did the patient recover. Besides the liver, almost all his organs (kidneys, heart, lungs) recovered in a few weeks, as well. Unfortunately, severe cortical and subcortical brain damage remained a crucial limiting impairment, leading to death 5 months later, due to pulmonary infection, yet with a perfectly working liver. We underlined the role of donor factors to predict the outcome after liver transplantation in the MELD era. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In liver transplantation the identification of risk factors and the risk quantification for each single case represent a field of great interest. There are donor-related and recipient-related risk factors. Donor risk index (DRI) was retrospectively calculated in 223 liver transplant cases. We did not include patients with preoperative diagnosis of hepatocarcinoma and retransplants. The cases were stratified into two classes according to the DRI (low risk, DRI < 1.7, and high risk, DRI ≥ 1.7). A new index, namely the organ patient index (OPI) was calculated adding the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score to the DRI. Patients were stratified into two classes according to the OPI (low risk, OPI ≤ 2.85, and high risk, OPI > 2.85). The cases with low DRI (n = 144) showed better survival than the cases with high DRI (n = 82; P < .02). The cases with low OPI (n = 173) showed better survival than cases with high OPI (n = 50; P < .01). The OPI predicted outcomes better than DRI, increasing the gap in the long-term graft survival between the low- and the high-risk class. The inclusion of the MELD in the new index allowed better prediction of graft survival. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Only patients with Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores ≥18 or ≥17 experience a survival benefit (SB) at 12 and 36 months after liver transplantation (OLT). The SB calculation estimates the difference after stratification for risk categories between the survival rate of transplanted versus waiting list patients. The aim of this study was to perform a short- and long-term (60 months) SB analyses of a Italian OLT program. One-hundred seventy-one patients were stratified into four MELD classes (6–14, 15–18, 19–25, 26–40), and two groups: namely, waiting list (WL) and transplanted groups (TX). The median waiting time for transplanted patients was 4.4 months (range, 0–35). SB was expressed as mortality hazard ratio (MHR) as obtained through a Cox regression analysis using as a covariate the status of each patient in the waiting list (WL = 0, reference group) or the TX group (TX = 1). Values over 1 indicated the MHR in favor of the WL with the values below 1 indicating MHR in favor of Tx. In the MELD class 6 to 14, the MHR was above 1 at 3 and 6 months, indicating an SB in favor of WL; subsequently, the MHR dropped below 1, indicating an SB in favor of TX (P < .05). In the MELD class 15 to 18 the MHR was above 1 at 3 months, but below 1 subsequently (P < .05). For MELD classes 19 to 25 and 26 to 40, the MHR was always below 1 (P < .01). According to the SB approach, patients in the MELD class 6 to 14 could safely wait for at least 36 months; patients in the MELD class 15 to 18 should likely remain no longer than 12 months on the waiting list, and all the remaining patients with MELD > 18 should be transplanted as soon as possible. OLT should not be precluded but only postponed for MELD < 19 patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: MELD and PELD scores of 255 consecutive grafts were calculated (236 adult cases and 19 pediatric cases). No correction for the etiology of liver disease was performed. Retransplants were excluded. Three categories of patients were identified: low MELD (scores <12, n = 61); intermediate MELD (scores between 12–24, n = 159); high MELD (scores ≥25, n = 35). Grafts were categorized according to donor quality: standard livers (n = 199), vs nonstandard livers (n = 56). Nonstandard livers were identified by age ≥60, or at least by two of the following conditions: severe hemodynamic instability, ultrasound evidence of steatosis, natriemia ≥155 mEq/L, ICU stay >7 days, liver trauma, protracted anoxia as cause of brain death, transaminases levels × 4. In standard livers, the 12-month graft survival (GS) for low, intermediate, and high MELD classes were 88%, 74%, and 77%, respectively. In nonstandard livers, the 12-month GS for the low, intermediate, and high MELD classes were 84%, 55%, and 44%, respectively; differences between low MELD class and both intermediate and high MELD classes were significant (P < .05). Cox regression analysis of all cases identified the following parameters as independent predictors of GS: donor status; donor age; and recipient creatinine. The highest correlation with GS was found using donor age and recipient creatinine as covariates. In standard livers no variable was able to predict GS. In nonstandard livers the MELD-PELD score was the unique variable able to predict GS. We suggest avoiding the use of nonstandard livers for patients with high MELD scores. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]