Search

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) is now the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States (US). It remains unclear how centers are managing the medical and psychosocial issues associated with these patients. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of LT centers in the United States to identify center-level details on peri-LT management of ALD and related issues. RESULTS: Of the 117 adult LT centers, 100 responses (85.5%) were collected, representing all Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network regions. For alcohol-associated cirrhosis, 70.0% of the centers reported no minimum sobriety requirement while 21.0% required 6 months of sobriety. LT for severe alcohol-associated hepatitis was performed at 85.0% of the centers. Monitoring protocols for pre-LT and post-LT alcohol use varied among centers. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlight a change in center attitudes toward LT for ALD, particularly for severe alcohol-associated hepatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a variably defined syndrome characterized by acute decompensation of cirrhosis with organ failures. At least 13 different definitions and diagnostic criteria for ACLF have been proposed, and there is increasing recognition that patients with ACLF may face disadvantages in the current United States liver allocation system. There is a need, therefore, for more standardized data collection and consensus to improve study design and outcome assessment in ACLF. In this article, we discuss the current landscape of transplantation for patients with ACLF, strategies to optimize organ utility, and data opportunities based on emerging technologies to facilitate improved data collection., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript have conflicts of interest to disclose, as described by the American Journal of Transplantation. J. Ge receives research support from Merck and Co; consults for Astellas Pharmaceuticals/Iota Biosciences and Madrigal Pharmaceuticals; and served on an advisory board for Gilead Sciences. The other authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose, as described by the American Journal of Transplantation., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Transplantation & American Society of Transplant Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Continuous risk-stratification of candidates and urgency-based prioritization have been utilized for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with non-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the United States. Instead, for patients with HCC, a dichotomous criterion with exception points is still used. This study evaluated the utility of the hazard associated with LT for HCC (HALT-HCC), an oncological continuous risk score, to stratify waitlist dropout and post-LT outcomes., Methods: A competing risk model was developed and validated using the UNOS database (2012-2021) through multiple policy changes. The primary outcome was to assess the discrimination ability of waitlist dropouts and LT outcomes. The study focused on the HALT-HCC score, compared with other HCC risk scores., Results: Among 23,858 candidates, 14,646 (59.9%) underwent LT and 5196 (21.8%) dropped out of the waitlist. Higher HALT-HCC scores correlated with increased dropout incidence and lower predicted 5-year overall survival after LT. HALT-HCC demonstrated the highest area under the curve (AUC) values for predicting dropout at various intervals post-listing (0.68 at 6 months, 0.66 at 1 year), with excellent calibration (R 2  = 0.95 at 6 months, 0.88 at 1 year). Its accuracy remained stable across policy periods and locoregional therapy applications., Conclusions: This study highlights the predictive capability of the continuous oncological risk score to forecast waitlist dropout and post-LT outcomes in patients with HCC, independent of policy changes. The study advocates integrating continuous scoring systems like HALT-HCC in liver allocation decisions, balancing urgency, organ utility, and survival benefit., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The exception point system for liver allocation in the United States allows for additional waitlist priority for candidates where the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease or Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease does not effectively represent their urgency or need for a transplant. In May 2019, the review process for liver exception cases transitioned from 11 Regional Review Boards (RRBs) to 1 National Liver Review Board (NLRB), intended to increase consistency nationwide, improve efficiency, and balance transplant access for candidates with and without exception scores. This report provides a review of liver exception request and review practices, waitlist outcomes, and transplant activity in the first 2 years after implementation of the NLRB and acuity circle-based distribution in the United States. We compared initial and extension exception request forms submitted from May 13, 2017 to May 13, 2019 (prepolicy or RRB era) to the period from February 4, 2020 to February 3, 2022 (postpolicy or NLRB era). During this time, the NLRB reviewed 10,083 initial exception requests and 12,686 extension requests. Notable postpolicy highlights include (1) an increase in the proportion of initial and extension requests that were automatically approved instead of manually reviewed; (2) a decrease in the overall approval rates of initial exception requests (87.8% for adult HCC, 64.3% for adult other diagnoses, and 71.5% for pediatric); and (3) reduction in the time from exception request submission to adjudication to a median of 3.73 days. The proportions of waitlist registration and deceased donor liver transplants for patients with exception scores decreased, and waitlist outcomes between patients with and without exception scores are now comparable. Implementation of the NLRB improved efficiency, reduced case workloads, and standardized criteria for exception cases, with similar waitlist outcomes between patients with and without exception scores and improved equity in terms of access to liver transplants., (Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

In 2022, liver transplant activity continued to increase in the United States, with an all-time high of 9,527 transplants performed, representing a 52% increase over the past decade (2012-2022). Of these transplants, 8,924 (93.7%) were from deceased donors and 603 (6.3%) were from living donors. Liver transplant recipients were 94.5% adult and 5.5% pediatric. The overall size of the liver transplant waiting list contracted, with more patients being removed than added, although 10,548 adult patients still remained on the waiting list at the end of 2022. Alcohol-associated liver disease continued to be the leading diagnosis among both candidates and recipients, followed by metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. Simultaneous liver-kidney transplant was the most common multiorgan combination, with 800 liver-kidney transplants performed in 2022; in addition, there were 303 new listings for kidney transplant via the safety net mechanism. Among adults added to the liver waiting list in 2021, 39.9% received a deceased donor liver transplant within 3 months; 45.7%, within 6 months; and 54.5%, within 1 year. Pretransplant mortality decreased to 12.3 deaths per 100 patient-years in 2022, although still 15.6% of removals from the waiting list were for death or being too sick for transplant. Graft and patient survival outcomes after deceased donor liver transplant improved, approximating pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, with 5.1% mortality observed at 6 months; 6.8%, at 1 year; 12.7%, at 3 years; 19.8%, at 5 years; and 35.7%, at 10 years. Five-year graft and patient survival rates after living donor liver transplant exceeded those of deceased donor liver transplant. Candidates receiving model for end-stage liver disease exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma constituted 15.5% of transplants performed in 2022, with similar transplant rates and posttransplant outcomes compared to cases without hepatocellular carcinoma exception. In 2022, more pediatric liver transplant candidates were added to the waiting list and underwent transplant compared with either of the preceding 2 years, with an uptick in living donor liver transplant volume. Although pretransplant mortality has improved after the recent policy change prioritizing pediatric donors for pediatric recipients, still, in 2022, 50 children died or were removed from the waiting list for being too sick to undergo transplant. Posttransplant mortality among pediatric liver transplant recipients remained notable, with death occurring in 4.0% at 6 months, 6.0% at 1 year, 8.2% at 3 years, 9.8% at 5 years, and 13.9% at 10 years. Similar to adult living donor recipients, pediatric living donor recipients had better 5-year patient survival compared with deceased donor recipients., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Standard eligibility criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) are in place in the United States. We hypothesize that the benefit associated with SLK over liver transplant alone differs by patient, depending on the specific SLK criteria met. We analyzed a retrospective US cohort of 5446 adult liver transplant or SLK recipients between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, who are potentially qualified for SLK. Exposure was a receipt of SLK. We tested effect modification by the specific SLK eligibility criteria met (end-stage kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or unknown). The primary outcome was death within 1 year of a liver transplant. We used a modified Cox regression analysis containing an interaction term of SLK * time from transplant. Two hundred ten (9%) SLK recipients and 351 (11%) liver-alone recipients died in 1 year. In the overall population, SLK was associated with a mortality benefit over liver transplant on the day of the transplant, without adjustment [HR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76)] and with adjustment [aHR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. However, when SLK eligibility criteria were included, only in patients with end-stage kidney disease was SLK associated with a sustained survival benefit at day 0 [HR: 0.17 (0.08-0.35)] up to 288 (95% CI, 120-649) days post-transplant. Benefit within the first year post-transplant associated with SLK over liver-alone transplantation was only pronounced in patients with end-stage kidney disease but not present in patients meeting other criteria for SLK. A "strict SLK liberal Safety Net" strategy may warrant consideration at the national policy level., (Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

In 2021, liver transplant volume continued to grow, with a record 9,234 transplants performed in the United States, 8,665 (93.8%) from deceased donors and 569 (6.2%) from living donors. There were 8,733 (94.6%) adult and 501 (5.4%) pediatric liver transplant recipients. An increase in the number of deceased donor livers corresponded to an increase in the overall transplant rate and shorter waiting times, although still 10.0% of livers that were recovered were not transplanted. Alcohol-associated liver disease was the leading indication for both waitlist registration and liver transplant in adults, outpacing nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, while biliary atresia remained the leading indication for children. Related to allocation policy changes implemented in 2019, the proportion of liver transplants performed for hepatocellular carcinoma has decreased. Among adult candidates listed for liver transplant in 2020, 37.7% received a deceased donor liver transplant within 3 months, 43.8% within 6 months, and 53.3% within 1 year. Pretransplant mortality improved for children following implementation of acuity circle-based distribution. Short-term graft and patient survival outcomes up to 1 year worsened for adult deceased and living donor liver transplant recipients, which is a reversal of previous trends and coincided with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. Longer-term outcomes among adult deceased donor liver transplant recipients were unaffected, with overall posttransplant mortality rates of 13.3% at 3 years, 18.6% at 5 years, and 35.9% at 10 years. Pretransplant mortality improved for children following implementation of acuity circle-based distribution and prioritization of pediatric donors to pediatric recipients in 2020. Pediatric living donor recipients had superior graft and patient survival outcomes compared with deceased donor recipients at all time points., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) had not traditionally considered biopsy results in risk-adjustment models, yet biopsy results may influence outcomes and thus decisions regarding organ acceptance., Methods: Using SRTR data, which includes data on all donors, waitlisted candidates, and transplant recipients in the United States, we assessed (1) the impact of macrovesicular steatosis on deceased donor yield (defined as number of livers transplanted per donor) and 1-y posttransplant graft failure and (2) the effect of incorporating this variable into existing SRTR risk-adjustment models., Results: There were 21 559 donors with any recovered organ and 17 801 liver transplant recipients included for analysis. Increasing levels of macrovesicular steatosis on donor liver biopsy predicted lower organ yield: ≥31% macrovesicular steatosis on liver biopsy was associated with 87% to 95% lower odds of utilization, with 55% of these livers being discarded. The hazard ratio for graft failure with these livers was 1.53, compared with those with no pretransplant liver biopsy and 0% to 10% steatosis. There was minimal change on organ procurement organization-specific deceased donor yield or program-specific posttransplant outcome assessments when macrovesicular steatosis was added to the risk-adjustment models., Conclusions: Donor livers with macrovesicular steatosis are disproportionately not transplanted relative to their risk for graft failure. To avoid undue risk aversion, SRTR now accounts for macrovesicular steatosis in the SRTR risk-adjustment models to help facilitate use of these higher-risk organs. Increased recognition of this variable may also encourage further efforts to standardize the reporting of liver biopsy results., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Policy changes in the United States have lengthened overall waiting times for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated temporal trends in utilization of locoregional therapy (LRT) and associated waitlist outcomes among liver transplant (LT) candidates in the United States., Methods: Data for primary adult LT candidates listed from 2003 to 2018 who received HCC exception were extracted from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Explant histology was examined, and multivariable competing risk analysis was used to evaluate the association between LRT type and waitlist dropout., Results: There were 31,609 eligible patients with at least 1 approved HCC exception, and 34,610 treatments among 24,145 LT candidates. The proportion with at least 1 LRT recorded increased from 42.3% in 2003 to 92.4% in 2018. Chemoembolization remains the most frequent type, followed by thermal ablation, with a notable increase in radioembolization from 3% in 2013 to 19% in 2018. An increased incidence of LRT was observed among patients with tumor burden beyond Milan criteria, higher α-fetoprotein level, and more compensated liver disease. Receipt of any type of LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout; there was no significant difference by number of LRTs. In inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis, radioembolization or ablation as the first LRT was associated with a reduced risk of waitlist dropout compared with chemoembolization., Conclusions: In a large nationwide cohort of LT candidates with HCC, LRT, and in particular radioembolization, increasingly was used to bridge to LT. Patients with greater tumor burden and those with more compensated liver disease received more treatments while awaiting LT. Bridging LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout., (Copyright © 2022 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) has been established as a reliable indicator of short-term survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. The current version (MELDNa), consisting of the international normalized ratio and serum bilirubin, creatinine, and sodium, has been used to determine organ allocation priorities for liver transplantation in the United States. The objective was to optimize MELD further by taking into account additional variables and updating coefficients with contemporary data., Methods: All candidates registered on the liver transplant wait list in the US national registry from January 2016 through December 2018 were included. Uni- and multivariable Cox models were developed to predict survival up to 90 days after wait list registration. Model fit was tested using the concordance statistic (C-statistic) and reclassification, and the Liver Simulated Allocation Model was used to estimate the impact of replacing MELDNa with the new model., Results: The final multivariable model was characterized by (1) additional variables of female sex and serum albumin, (2) interactions between bilirubin and sodium and between albumin and creatinine, and (3) an upper bound for creatinine at 3.0 mg/dL. The final model (MELD 3.0) had better discrimination than MELDNa (C-statistic, 0.869 vs 0.862; P < .01). Importantly, MELD 3.0 correctly reclassified a net of 8.8% of decedents to a higher MELD tier, affording them a meaningfully higher chance of transplantation, particularly in women. In the Liver Simulated Allocation Model analysis, MELD 3.0 resulted in fewer wait list deaths compared to MELDNa (7788 vs 7850; P = .02)., Conclusion: MELD 3.0 affords more accurate mortality prediction in general than MELDNa and addresses determinants of wait list outcomes, including the sex disparity., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In the United States, centers performing liver transplant (LT) are primarily evaluated by patient survival within 1 year after LT, but tight clustering of outcomes allows only a narrow window for evaluation of center variation for quality improvement. Alternate measures more relevant to patients and the transplant community are needed. We examined adults listed for LT in the United States, using data submitted to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Intention-to-treat (ITT) survival was defined as survival within 1 year from listing, regardless of transplant. Mixed effects/frailty models were used to assess center variation in ITT survival. Between January 2010 and December 2016, there were 66,428 new listings at 113 centers. Overall, median 1-year ITT survival was 79.8% (interquartile range [IQR], 76.1%-83.4%), whereas 1-year waiting-list (WL) survival was 75.8% (IQR, 71.2%-79.4%), and 1-year post-LT survival was 90.0% (IQR, 87.9%-91.8%). Higher rates of ITT mortality were correlated with increased WL mortality (correlation, r = 0.76), increased post-LT mortality (r = 0.31), lower volume centers (r = -0.34), and lower transplant rate ratio (r = -0.25). Similar patterns were observed in the subgroup of WL candidates listed with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≥25: median 1-year ITT survival was 65.2% (IQR, 60.2%-72.6%), whereas 1-year post-LT survival was 87.5% (IQR, 84.0%-90.9%), and 1-year WL survival was 36.6% (IQR, 27.9%-47.0%). In mixed effects modeling, the transplant center was an independent predictor of ITT survival even after adjustment for age, sex, MELD, and sociodemographic variables. Center variation for ITT survival was larger compared with post-LT survival. The measurement of ITT outcome offers a complementary method to assess center performance. This is a first step toward understanding differences in program quality beyond patient and graft survival after LT., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background and Aims: Although most large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions can be safely and efficaciously removed using EMR, the use of colectomy for benign colorectal lesions appears to be increasing. The reason(s) is unclear. We aimed to determine the use and adverse events of EMR in the United States., Methods: We used Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2003-2016), a database from a large national insurance provider, to identify all colonoscopies performed with either EMR or simple polypectomy on adult patients from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. We measured time trends, regional variation, and adverse event rates. We assessed risk factors for adverse events using multivariate logistic regression., Results: The rate of EMR use in the US increased from 1.62% of all colonoscopies in 2011 to 2.48% of colonoscopies in 2015 (P < .001). There were, however, significant regional differences in the use of EMRs, from 2.4% of colonoscopies in the western United States to 2.0% of colonoscopies in the southern United States. Between 2011 and 2015, we found stable rates of perforation, GI bleeding (GIB), infections, and cardiac adverse events and decreasing rates of admissions after EMR. In our multivariate model, EMR was an independent risk factor for adverse events, albeit the rates of adverse events were low (1.35% GIB, .22% perforation)., Conclusions: Use of EMR is rising in the United States, although there is significant regional variation. The rates of adverse events after EMR and polypectomies were low and stable, confirming the continued safety of EMR procedures. A better understanding of the regional barriers and facilitators may improve the use of EMR as the standard management for benign colorectal lesions throughout the United States., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Patients in need of liver transplantation may travel to improve their chance of receiving an organ. We evaluated factors to determine which transplant candidates travel to other regions to increase their chances of receiving a liver and effects of travel on waitlist outcomes., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients registered for primary deceased donor liver transplantation in the United States from January 2004 to December 2016. Zip code data were used to calculate the travel distance from a patient's residence to centers at which they were on the waitlist or received a liver transplant. Distant listing and migration were defined as placement on a waitlist and receipt of liver transplantation, respectively, outside the home transplantation region and greater than 500 miles from the home zip code. We assessed the effect of distant listing on outcomes (death and liver transplantation) and predictors of distant listing or migration using multivariable analyses., Results: There were 104,914 waitlist registrations during the study period; of these, 2930 (2.8%) pursued listing at a distant center. Of waitlist registrants, 60,985 received liver transplants, of whom 1985 (3.3%) had migrated. In a multivariable competing risk analysis in which liver transplantation was considered as a competing event, distant listing was associated with a 22% reduction in the risk of death within 1 year (subhazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.88). Distant listing and migration were associated with non-black race, non-Medicaid payer, residence in a higher income area, and education beyond high school., Conclusions: Placement on a liver transplant waitlist outside the home transplantation region is associated with reduced waitlist mortality and an increased probability of receiving a liver transplant. Geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation have disproportionate effects on patients who are minorities, have lower levels of education, or have public insurance., (Copyright © 2019 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) receiving direct acting antivirals (DAAs) has been debated. This study aims to describe the incidence of HCC among patients listed for liver transplantation (LT) in the DAA era. Individuals with cirrhosis listed for LT from January 2003 to December 2015 were identified using the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients database. Patients with HCC at listing or HCC exception within 180 days were excluded. Patients were divided into three eras based on listing date: eras 1 (2003-2010), 2 (2011-2013), and 3 (2014-2015). Incidence rates of HCC were calculated by era and compared using incident rate ratios (IRRs). The association between HCC and listing era was evaluated using Cox regression and competing risk analyses, the latter considering death and LT as competing events. Of the 48,158 eligible wait-list registrants, 3112 (6.5%) received HCC exceptions after a median of 493 days. In 20,039 individuals with HCV, the incidence of HCC was 49% higher in era 3 versus era 1 (IRR 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.79). In multivariate analysis, those in era 3 had a higher hazard of HCC compared with era 1 (hazard ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.48). However, in multivariable competing risks analysis, with death and LT considered as competing events for de novo HCC, era was no longer associated with HCC (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.69-1.00)., Conclusion: In this large population-based cohort of LT registrants, the incidence of HCC among HCV patients has increased in the DAA era. Competing risks analysis suggests that this may be explained by changes in rates of LT and wait-list mortality in the HCV population during this time. (Hepatology 2018; 00:000-000)., (© 2018 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)