Search

Background: Despite most liver transplants in North America being from deceased donors, the number of living donor liver transplants has increased over the last decade. Although outcomes of liver retransplantation after deceased donor liver transplantation have been widely published, outcomes of retransplant after living donor liver transplant need to be further elucidated. Method: We aimed to compare waitlist outcomes and survival post-retransplant in recipients of initial living or deceased donor grafts. Adult liver recipients relisted at University Health Network between April 2000 and October 2020 were retrospectively identified and grouped according to their initial graft: living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplant. A competing risk multivariable model evaluated the association between graft type at first transplant and outcomes after relisting. Survival after retransplant waitlisting (intention-to-treat) and after retransplant (per protocol) were also assessed. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the effect of initial graft type on survival after retransplant. Results: A total of 201 recipients were relisted (living donor liver transplants, n = 67; donor liver transplants, n = 134) and 114 underwent retransplant (living donor liver transplants, n = 48; deceased donor liver transplants, n = 66). The waitlist mortality with an initial living donor liver transplant was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.23–1.10; P = .08). Both unadjusted and adjusted graft loss risks were similar post-retransplant. The risk-adjusted overall intention-to-treat survival after relisting (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.44–1.32; P = .30) and per protocol survival after retransplant (hazard ratio:1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.54–4.19; P = .40) were equivalent in those who initially received a living donor liver transplant. Conclusion: Patients requiring relisting and retransplant after either living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplantation experience similar waitlist and survival outcomes.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an attractive alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Although both modalities have similar short-term outcomes, long-term outcomes are not well studied. We compared the 20-year outcomes of 668 adults who received LDLT with1596 DDLTs at the largest liver transplantation (LT) program in Canada. Recipients of LDLT were significantly younger and more often male than DDLT recipients (P 0.001). Autoimmune diseases were more frequent in LDLT, whereas viral hepatitis and alcohol-related liver disease were more frequent in DDLT. LDLT recipients had lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (P = 0.008), spent less time on the waiting list (P 0.001), and were less often inpatients at the time of LT (P 0.001). In a nonadjusted analysis, 1-year, 10-year, and 20-year patient survival rates were significantly higher in LDLT (93%, 74%, and 56%, respectively) versus DDLT (91%, 67%, and 46%, respectively; log-rank P = 0.02) as were graft survival rates LDLT (91%, 67%, and 50%, respectively) versus (90%, 65%, and 44.3%, respectively, for DDLT; log-rank P = 0.31). After multivariable adjustment, LDLT and DDLT were associated with a similar hazard of patient and graft survival. Our data of 20 years of follow-up of LDLT from a single, large Western center demonstrates excellent long-term outcomes for recipients of LDLT.

BACKGROUND The main concern with live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the risk to the donor. Given the potential risk of liver insufficiency, most centers will only accept candidates with future liver remnants (FLR) >30%. We aimed to compare postoperative outcomes of donors who underwent LDLT with FLR ≤30% and >30%. METHODS Adults who underwent right hepatectomy for LDLT between 2000 and 2018 were analyzed. Remnant liver volumes were estimated using hepatic volumetry. To adjust for between-group differences, donors with FLR ≤30% and >30% were matched 1:2 based on baseline characteristics. Postoperative complications including liver dysfunction were compared between the groups. RESULTS A total of 604 live donors were identified, 28 (4.6%) of whom had a FLR ≤30%. Twenty-eight cases were successfully matched with 56 controls; the matched cohorts were mostly similar in terms of donor and graft characteristics. The calculated median FLR was 29.8 (range, 28.0-30.0) and 35.2 (range, 30.1-68.1) in each respective group. Median follow-up was 36.5 mo (interquartile range, 11.8-66.1). Postoperative outcomes were similar between groups. No difference was observed in overall complication rates (FLR ≤30%: 32.1% versus FLR >30%: 28.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-3.27) or major complication rates (FLR ≤30%: 14.3% versus FLR >30%: 14.3%; OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.33-4.10). Posthepatectomy liver failure was rare, and no difference was observed (FLR ≤30%: 3.6% versus FLR >30%: 3.6%; OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.11-11.1). CONCLUSION A calculated FLR between 28% and 30% on its own should not represent a formal contraindication for live donation.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background. Several studies have described the clinical features of COVID-19 in solid-organ transplant recipients. However, many have been retrospective or limited to more severe cases (hospitalized) and have not routinely included serial virological sampling (especially in outpatients) and immunologic assessment. Methods. Transplant patients diagnosed with COVID-19 based on a respiratory sample PCR were prospectively followed up to 90 d. Patients provided consent for convalescent serum samples and serial nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antibody (antinucleoprotein and anti-RBD) and viral load, respectively. Results. In the 161 SOT recipients diagnosed with COVID-19, the spectrum of disease ranged from asymptomatic infection (4.3%) to hospitalization (60.6%), supplemental oxygen requirement (43.1%), mechanical ventilation (22.7%), and death (15.6%). Increasing age (OR, 1.031; 95% CI, 1.001-1.062; P = 0.046) and ≥2 comorbid conditions (OR, 3.690; 95% CI, 1.418-9.615; P = 0.007) were associated with the need for supplemental oxygen. Allograft rejection was uncommon (3.7%) despite immunosuppression modification. Antibody response at ≥14 d postsymptoms onset was present in 90% (anti-RBD) and 76.7% (anti-NP) with waning of anti-NP titers and stability of anti-RBD over time. Median duration of nasopharyngeal positivity was 10.0 d (IQR, 5.5–18.0) and shedding beyond 30 d was observed in 6.7% of patients. The development of antibody did not have an impact on viral shedding. Conclusions. This study demonstrates the spectrum of COVID-19 illness in transplant patients. Risk factors for severe disease are identified. The majority form antibody by 2 wk with differential stability over time. Prolonged viral shedding was observed in a minority of patients. Reduction of immunosuppression was a safe strategy.

Paired organ exchange can be used to circumvent living donor-recipient ABO incompatibilities. Herein, we present the first case of successful liver paired exchange in North America. This 2-way swap required 4 simultaneous operations: 2 living donor hepatectomies and 2 living donor liver transplants. A nondirected anonymous living donor gift initiated this domino exchange, alleviating an ABO incompatibility in the other donor-recipient pair. With careful attention to ethical and logistical issues, paired liver exchange is a feasible option to expand the donor pool for incompatible living liver donor-recipient pairs.

Background There is an interest in understanding the association between early calcineurin inhibitors exposure post-liver transplantation (LT) and long-term outcomes. We aimed to analyze this association exploring median calcineurin inhibitor levels and intrapatient variability (IPV) in a multicenter, retrospective cohort. Methods Tacrolimus (Tac) and Cyclosporine (CsA) levels obtained during the first 15 days post-LT were collected. High immunosuppression (IS) was considered as a median of Tac, CsA blood trough levels 12 hours after drug administration, or blood levels 2 hours after drug administration higher than 10, 250, or 1200 ng/mL, respectively, or a peak of Tac >20 ng/mL. Optimal IS was defined as a median of Tac, CsA blood trough levels 12 hours after drug administration, or blood levels 2 hours after drug administration levels between 7 and 10, 150 and 250, or 800 and 1200 ng/mL. Low IS was defined as below the thresholds of optimal IS. IPV was estimated during the first 15 days post-LT. Results The study included 432 patients with a median follow-up of 8.65 years. IS regimen was based on either Tac or CsA in 243 (56.3%) and 189 (43.8%), respectively. There were no differences in terms of graft loss among low versus optimal and high IS groups (P = 0.812 and P = 0.451) nor in high versus low IPV (P = 0.835). Only viral hepatitis and arterial hypertension were independently associated with higher graft loss (hazard ratio = 1.729, P = 0.029 and hazard ratio = 1.570, P = 0.021). Conclusions In contrast to what has previously been reported, no association was found between very early postoperative over IS or high IPV and long-term outcome measures following LT. Strategies aimed at reducing these long-term events should likely focus on other factors or on a different IS time window.

Recipients of donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts are reportedly at higher risk of developing renal dysfunction after liver transplantation (LT). We compared the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) after LT in recipients of DCD versus donation after brain death (DBD) or living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) livers. Adult recipients of DBD, LDLT, and DCD between 2012 and 2016 at Toronto General Hospital were included. AKI was defined as a post‐LT increase of serum creatinine (sCr) ≥26.5 µmol/L within 48 hours or a ≥50% increase from baseline, and CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate 3 months. A total of 681 patients (DCD, n = 57; DBD, n = 446; and LDLT, n = 178) with similar baseline comorbidities were included. Perioperative AKI (within the first 7 postoperative days) was observed more frequently in the DCD group (61%; DBD, 40%; and LDLT, 44%; P = 0.01) and was associated with significantly higher peak AST levels (P

In western countries, the timing of liver retransplantation depends on recipient prioritization on the wait-list, as determined by their model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and the availability of an appropriate deceased donor graft. Unfortunately, the MELD score in these patients often does not reflect their medical condition accurately, resulting in an increased risk of wait-list mortality1 . Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers the potential of timely retransplantation with a high quality graft.

The outcome after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using grafts with multiple bile ducts (BDs) remains unclear. We analyzed 510 patients who received an adult-to-adult right lobe LDLT between 2000 and 2015 and compared outcome parameters of those receiving grafts with 2 BDs (n = 169) with patients receiving grafts with 1 BD (n = 320). Additionally, patients receiving a graft with 3 BDs (n = 21) were analyzed. Demographic variables and disease severity were similar between the groups. Roux-en-Y reconstruction was significantly more common in the 2 BD group (77% versus 38%; P < 0.001) compared with the 1 BD group. No difference was found in biliary complication rates within 1 year after LDLT (1 BD versus 2 BD groups, 18% versus 21%, respectively; P = 0.46). In the 2 BD group, 82/169 (48.5%) patients were reconstructed with 2 anastomoses. The number of anastomoses did not negatively impact biliary complication rates. Recipients' major complication rate (Clavien ≥ 3b) was similar between both groups (1 BD versus 2 BD groups, 21% versus 24%, respectively; P = 0.36). Furthermore, no difference could be found between the 1 BD, the 2 BD, and the 3 BD groups in the frequency of developing biliary complications within 1 year (18%, 21%, 14%, respectively; P = 0.64), BD strictures (15%, 15%, 5%, respectively; P = 0.42), or BD leaks (10%, 11%, 10%, respectively; P = 0.98). In addition, the 1-year (90% versus 91%), 5-year (82% versus 77%), and 10-year (70% versus 66%) graft survival rates as well as the 1-year (92% versus 93%), 5-year (84% versus 80%), and 10-year (75% versus 76%) patient survival rates were comparable between the 1 BD and the 2 BD groups (P = 0.41 and P = 0.54, respectively). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that selected living donor grafts with 2 BDs can be used safely without negatively impacting biliary complication rates and graft or patient survival rates.

Organ allocation in liver transplantation (LT) remains imperfect. Periodic center reviews ensure programs transparently evaluate the impact of practice on access to transplantation, reflecting, in particular, patient (primary disease, social determinants) and program (deceased versus live donation) factors. Adult Ontario residents waitlisted for first LT at Toronto General Hospital from November 2012 to May 2019 were reviewed. Analyses were performed between distance to transplant center, income, education level, population density and primary liver disease, with LT, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT), living donor liver transplant (LDLT), and delisting. Of 1735 listed patients, 549 were delisted (32%), while 1071 were transplanted (62%), with 819 DDLT recipients (76%) and 252 LDLT recipients (24%), while 115 (7%) remained actively listed at data census. On univariate analysis, DDLT recipients lived 30% closer (median 39.7 versus 60.6 km; P < 0.001), lived in more populous areas (median 8501.0 versus 6868.5 people in a 1-km radius; P < 0.001), and resided in households that annually earned 10% less (median $92,643.17 versus $102,820.89 Canadian dollars; P < 0.001) compared with LDLT recipients. These findings with population density and income differences between DDLT versus LDLT receival remained significant on multivariate modeling even when accounting for primary liver disease. Primary liver disease was a statistically significant factor on multivariate analyses in LT receival (P = 0.001) as well as DDLT versus LDLT receival (P < 0.001). Of patients listed for end-stage liver disease, more patients with autoimmune cholestatic liver diseases received LDLT (34%-41%) than DDLT (27%-30%); this contrasted with patients with noncholestatic diseases LDLT (8%-19%) versus DDLT (37%-59%) receival (P < 0.001). Review of transplant allocation in a large mixed-donor North American liver transplant program demonstrates how patient social determinants and primary liver disease etiology continue to be significantly associated with ultimate transplantation.

Background Liver transplantation (LT) remains the curative treatment for symptomatic Polycystic Liver Disease (PCLD) patients and is associated with excellent survival rates. The aim of the study is to review the Ontario experience in LT for PCLD. Methods A retrospective study was performed from pre-existing LT databases from the LT Units at Toronto General Hospital and London Health Sciences Center, which are the two LT programs in Ontario, Canada. This database contains demographic, clinical parameters and follow-up of all patients transplanted for PCLD. Data was extracted for patients who underwent LT between January 2000–April 2017 and included follow up until December 31st, 2018. Results A total of 3560 patients underwent LT, of whom 51 (1.4%) had PCLD and met inclusion criteria. 43 (84%) of these patients were female. The median physiologic Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD-Na) score at time of referral was 13 (IQR = 7–22), however all patients required MELD-Na exception points to receive LT. The median age of transplant was 62 years (IQR = 59–64) for male vs. 52 (IQR = 45–56) for female patients. 33 (65%) of our cohort had PCLD while 9 (17.5%) had ADPKD and 9 (17.5%) had both diseases. 39 (76%) had LT due to symptoms of mass effect, while 8 (16%) had portal hypertensive complications. After a median follow-up of 6.3 (IQR = 2.9–12.5) years, the probability of survival was 96% (95% CI: 90%, 100%). Log-rank test, comparing survival analysis between males and females did not show a statistically significant difference (p = 0.26). Conclusion Most patients underwent LT for PCLD due to symptoms of mass effect with women being more likely than men to undergo LT. LT for PCLD had excellent long-term survival.

BACKGROUND There is a lack of data on the use of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) on the risk of death and tumoral recurrence in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) listed for liver transplantation (LT). We aimed to assess the impact of antiviral treatment on mortality and HCC recurrence patients with HCC-HCV. METHODS This was a retrospective multicenter study of patients with HCC-HCV listed for LT from 2005 to 2015. Patients were divided according to the antiviral treatment received after HCC diagnosis: DAA, interferon (IFN), or no antiviral. Intention-to-treat overall survival and HCC recurrence incidence were compared by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for outcomes. RESULTS A total of 1012 HCV-HCC patients were listed for LT during the study period. The median follow-up was 4.0 (interquartile range = 2.3-6.7) years. Mortality was 5.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3-7.2), 13.1 (95% CI, 11.0-15.7), and 6.2 (95% CI, 5.4-7.2) deaths per 100 person-year among patients treated with DAA, IFN, and antiviral naive, respectively (P < 0.001). Of the 875 HCV-HCC transplant recipients, the 5-year recurrence-free survival was 93.4%, 84.8%, 73.9% for the pre-LT DAA, pre-LT IFN, and antiviral naive groups, respectively (P < 0.001). After multivariable regression, the use of pre-LT DAA was not associated to risk of recurrence (hazard ratio = 0.44 [95% CI, 0.19-1.00]). Post-LT DAA was not related to increased risk of recurrence (hazard ratio = 0.62 [95% CI, 0.33-1.16]). CONCLUSIONS In this multicenter intent-to-treat study, DAA therapy was not found to be a risk factor for mortality or HCC recurrence after adjusting for potential confounders.

Because of the shortfall between the number of patients listed for liver transplantation (LT) and the available grafts, strategies to expand the donor pool have been developed. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) and living donor (LD) grafts are not universally used because of the concerns of graft failure, biliary complications, and donor risks. In order to overcome the barriers for the implementation of using all 3 types of grafts, we compared outcomes after LT of DCD, LD, and donation after brain death (DBD) grafts. Patients who received a LD, DCD, or DBD liver graft at the University of Toronto were included. Between January 2009 through April 2017, 1054 patients received a LT at our center. Of these, 77 patients received a DCD graft (DCD group); 271 received a LD graft (LD group); and 706 received a DBD graft (DBD group). Overall biliary complications were higher in the LD group (11.8%) compared with the DCD group (5.2%) and the DBD group (4.8%; P < 0.001). The 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year graft survival rates were similar between the groups with 88.3%, 83.2%, and 69.2% in the DCD group versus 92.6%, 85.4%, and 84.7% in the LD group versus 90.2%, 84.2%, and 79.9% in the DBD group (P = 0.24). Furthermore, the 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year patient survival was comparable, with 92.2%, 85.4%, and 71.6% in the DCD group versus 95.2%, 88.8%, and 88.8% in the LD group versus 93.1%, 87.5%, and 83% in the DBD group (P = 0.14). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that the type of graft did not impact graft survival. In conclusion, DCD, LD, and DBD grafts have similar longterm graft survival rates. Increasing the use of LD and DCD grafts may improve access to LT without affecting graft survival rates. Liver Transplantation 24 779–789 2018 AASLD.

Background & Aims In 2018, our team initiated a prospective pilot program to challenge the paradigm of the "6-month rule" of abstinence for patients with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) requiring transplant. Our pilot involved an in-depth examination of patients' alcohol use, social support, and psychiatric comorbidity, as well as the provision of pre- and post-transplantation addiction treatment. Methods Patients with ALD were assessed for inclusion in the pilot by a multidisciplinary team. Relapse prevention therapy was provided directly to all patients deemed to meet the program's inclusion criteria. Random biomarker testing for alcohol was used pre and post transplantation. Results We received 703 referrals from May 1, 2018 to October 31, 2020. After fulfilling the program's criteria, 101 patients (14%) were listed for transplantation and 44 (6.2%) received transplants. There were no significant differences in survival rates between those receiving transplants through the pilot program compared with a control group with more than 6 months of abstinence (P = .07). Three patients returned to alcohol use during an average post-transplantation follow-up period of 339 days. In a multivariate analysis, younger age and lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores at listing were associated with an increased likelihood of a return to alcohol use (P Conclusions Our prospective program provided direct monitoring and relapse prevention treatment for patients with ALD and with less than 6 months of abstinence and resulted in a reduction of post-transplantation return to drinking. This pilot study provides a framework for the future of more equitable transplant care.

Increased-risk donor (IRD) organs make up a significant proportion of the deceased organ donor pool but may be declined by patients on the waiting list for various reasons. We conducted a survey of patients awaiting a liver transplant to determine the factors leading to the acceptance of an IRD organ as well as what strategies could increase the rate of acceptance. Adult liver transplant candidates who were outpatients completed a survey of 51 questions on a 5-point Likert scale with categories related to demographics, knowledge of IRDs, and likelihood of acceptance. A total of 150 transplant candidates completed the survey (age 19-80 years). Male patients constituted 67.3%. Many patients (58.7%) had postsecondary education. Only 23.3% of patients had a potential living donor, and 58/144 (40.3%) were not optimistic about receiving an organ in the next 3 months. The overall IRD organ acceptance rate was 41.1%, whereas 26.2% said they would decline an IRD organ. Women were more likely to accept an IRD organ (54.3% versus 34.7%; P = 0.02). Those who had a college education or higher tended to have lower IRD organ acceptability (28.3% versus 47.4%; P = 0.07). Acceptability also increased as the specified transmission risk of human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus decreased (P < 0.001). Patients were also more likely to accept an IRD organ if they were educated on the benefits of IRD organs (eg, knowledge that an IRD organ was of better quality increased overall acceptance from 41.1% to 63.3%; P < 0.001). Our survey provides insight into liver transplant candidates who would benefit from greater education on IRD organs. Strategies targeting specific educational points are likely to increase acceptability.

Objective: To compare the outcome of adult live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with grafts from older versus younger donors. Introduction: Using older donor grafts for adult LDLT may help expand the donor pool. However, the risks of LDLT with older donors remain controversial, and many centers are reluctant to use live donors aged 45 years or older for adult LDLT. Methods: Outcomes of patients receiving a LDLT graft from donors aged 50 years or older (n = 91) were compared with those receiving a live donor graft from donors younger than 50 years (n = 378). Results: Incidences of biliary (LDLT

Lung transplantation using RNA+ hepatitis C (HCV+) donors to seronegative recipients is not currently performed due to the very high risk of transmission. Previous reports have shown poor survival when this practice was applied. The emergence of new direct-acting antiviral drugs (DAA) suggests a high chance of sustained virologic response in immunocompetent patients. We report here successful transplantation of lungs from HCV+ donor to HCV- recipient. The recipient was an HCV- patient with chronic lung allograft dysfunction. Viral transmission occurred early posttransplant but excellent clinical outcomes were observed including elimination of HCV after 12 weeks of treatment using DAAs.

There are conflicting reports on the outcomes after live donor liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the survival of patients with HCC, with a potential live donor (pLDLT) at listing vs. no potential donor (pDDLT), on an intention-to-treat basis.All patients with HCC listed for liver transplantation between 2000-2015 were included. The pLDLT group was comprised of recipients with a potential live donor identified at listing. Patients without a live donor were included in the pDDLT group. Survival was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression was applied to identify potential predictors of mortality.A total of 219 patients were included in the pLDLT group and 632 patients in the pDDLT group. In the pLDLT group, 57 patients (26%) were beyond the UCSF criteria whereas 119 patients (19%) in the pDDLT group were beyond (p = 0.02). Time on the waiting list was shorter for the pLDLT than the pDDLT group (4.8 [2.9-8.5] months vs. 6.2 [3.0-12.0] months, respectively, p = 0.02). The dropout rate was 32/219 (14.6%) in the pLDLT and 174/632 (27.5%) in the pDDLT group, p 0.001. The 1-, 3- and 5-year intention-to-treat survival rates were 86%, 72% and 68% in the pLDLT vs. 82%, 63% and 57% in the pDDLT group, p = 0.02. Having a potential live donor was a protective factor for death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.53-0.86). Waiting times of 9-12 months (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.02-2.31) and ≥12 months (HR 1.69; 95% CI 1.23-2.32) were predictors of death.Having a potential live donor at listing was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of death in patients with HCC in this intention-to-treat analysis. This benefit is related to a lower dropout rate and a shorter waiting period.Liver transplantation (LT) offers the best chance of survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and can be performed using grafts from deceased donors or live donors. In this work, we aimed to assess the differences in survival after live donor LT when compared to deceased donor LT. We studied 219 patients listed for live donor LT and 632 patients listed for deceased donor LT. Patients who had a potential live donor at the time of listing had a higher survival rate. Therefore, being listed for a live donor LT was a protective factor against death.

The authors assessed the incidence, management, and risk factors for postoperative complications after right lobe (RL) live donor hepatectomy in a high-volume center in North America. All donors undergoing an RL live donor hepatectomy between 2000 and 2017 at our institution were included. The primary outcome was the development of complications (both medical and surgical). Predictors of postoperative complications were determined by logistic regression. A total of 587 patients underwent RL live donor hepatectomy. Among those, 187 postoperative complications were diagnosed in 141 (24%) patients. One patient had >90-day morbidity, and there were no donor deaths. Overall complications were significantly higher in the first era, 2000 to 2008 (81 [57.4%]) versus the second era, 2009 to 2017 (60 [42.6%]) (p = 0.01). On multivariate analysis, the only predictor of postoperative complications was the center volume of RL live donor hepatectomy in the previous 12 months with an odds ratio of 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.95–0.99). In conclusion, increasing center volume is associated with lower rates of postoperative complications after RL living liver donation.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) can occur de novo in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) for indications other than NAFLD, and it has been increasingly recognized as a complication in the post-LT setting. This study aims to better characterize de novo NAFLD after LT by identifying risk factors for its development, describing incidence and extent of fibrosis, assessing the diagnostic utility of noninvasive serum fibrosis algorithms, and comparing survival to those without NAFLD. This was a retrospective single-center analysis of de novo NAFLD in a post-LT cohort. Those whose primary indication for LT was nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) were excluded. Risk factors were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses. De novo NAFLD and fibrosis were assessed on posttransplant liver biopsies, and noninvasive fibrosis scores were calculated from concomitant blood tests. After applying the exclusion criteria, 430 for-cause post-LT biopsies were evaluated; 33.3% (n = 143) had evidence of de novo steatosis and/or NASH at a median of 3.0 years after transplant. On multivariate analysis, body mass index (BMI; odds ratio [OR], 1.12; P < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (OR, 3.01; P = 0.002), hepatitis C virus (OR, 4.61; P < 0.001), weight gain (OR, 1.03; P = 0.007), and sirolimus use (OR, 3.11; P = 0.02) were predictive of de novo NAFLD after LT. Significant fibrosis (≥F2) was present in almost 40% of the cohort. Noninvasive serum fibrosis scores were not useful diagnostic tests. There was no significant difference in the short-term or longterm survival of patients who developed de novo NAFLD. In conclusion, diabetes, BMI, weight gain after LT, and sirolimus-based immunosuppression, in keeping with insulin resistance, were the only modifiable factors associated with development of de novo NAFLD. A significant proportion of patients with de novo NAFLD had fibrosis and given the limited utility of noninvasive serum fibrosis algorithms, alternative noninvasive tools are required to screen for fibrosis in this population. There was no significant difference in the short-term or longterm survival of patients who developed de novo NAFLD.

Data regarding transplantation outcomes in ventilated intensive care unit (ICU)–dependent patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) are conflicting. This single-center cohort study investigated the outcomes of patients with ESLD who were intubated with mechanical support before liver transplantation (LT). The ICU plus intubation group consisted of 42 patients with decompensated cirrhosis and mechanical ventilation before transplantation. LT was considered for intubated ICU patients if the fraction of inspired oxygen was ≤40% with a positive end-expiratory pressure ≤ 10, low pressor requirements, and the absence of an active infection. Intubated ICU patients were compared to 80 patients requiring ICU admission before transplantation without intubation and to 126 matched non–ICU-bound patients. Patients requiring ICU care with intubation and ICU care alone had more severe postoperative complications than non–ICU-bound patients. Intubation before transplantation was associated with more postoperative pneumonias (15% in intubated ICU transplant candidates, 5% in ICU-bound but not intubated patients, and 3% in control group patients; P = 0.02). Parameters of reperfusion injury and renal function on postoperative day (POD) 2 and POD 7 were similar in all groups. Bilirubin levels were higher in the ICU plus intubation group at POD 2 and POD 7 after transplantation but were normalized in all groups within 3 months. The ICU plus intubation group versus the ICU-only group and the non-ICU group had decreased 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival (81% versus 84% versus 92%, 76% versus 78% versus 87%, and 71% versus 77% versus 84%, respectively; P = 0.19), but statistical significance was not reached. A Glasgow coma scale score of 7 before transplantation was associated with high postoperative mortality in ICU-bound patients requiring intubation (38% versus 23%; P = 0.01). In conclusion, ICU admission and mechanical ventilation should not be considered contraindications for LT. With careful patient selection, acceptable long-term outcomes can be achieved despite increased postoperative complications. Liver Transpl 21:761–767, 2015. © 2015 AASLD.

BACKGROUND Reactivation of human herpesvirus (HHV)-6 and HHV-7 has been linked to various posttransplant adverse events through immunomodulatory effects. The potential utility of monitoring for HHV-6 and HHV-7 viremia remains unclear. METHODS In this clinical trial, 129 liver transplant recipients were randomized to be monitored in real-time for HHV-6 and HHV-7 viremia by polymerase chain reaction at regular intervals from 0 to 12 weeks after transplantation ("monitoring" group) or to undergo usual care ("no-monitoring" group). Therapeutic intervention for a positive polymerase chain reaction result included reduction in immunosuppression and preemptive antiviral therapy, at the discretion of the attending team. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse events indirectly attributable to viral reactivation (including opportunistic infection, graft rejection and severe hepatitis C virus recurrence). RESULTS In the "monitoring" group, HHV-6 and HHV-7 viremia occurred in 23 of 64 patients (35.9%) and 21 of 64 patients (32.8%) patients, respectively. We found no cases of symptomatic HHV-6 and HHV-7 disease. Some therapeutic interventions were performed in 59.1% of viremic episodes. There were no differences in cumulative incidence of the primary outcome between the "monitoring" and "no-monitoring" groups at 1 year (58.7% vs. 52.3%; odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-1.55) or at 5 years after transplantation (79.0% vs. 70.3%; odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-1.42). However, we found a trend toward a lower incidence of graft rejection at year 1 in the "monitoring" group (30.2% vs. 44.6%; P=0.091). CONCLUSION In this first trial, no benefit could be demonstrated from routine monitoring of HHV-6 and HHV-7 viremia in graft or patient outcome after liver transplantation.

Background The annual standard-dose (SD) influenza vaccine has suboptimal immunogenicity in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). Influenza vaccine that contains higher doses of antigens may lead to greater immunogenicity in this population. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial to compare the safety and immunogenicity of the 2016-2017 high-dose (HD; FluzoneHD, Sanofi) vs SD (Fluviral, GSK) influenza vaccine in adult SOTRs. Preimmunization and 4-week postimmunization sera underwent strain-specific hemagglutination inhibition assay. Results We enrolled 172 patients who received study vaccine, and 161 (84 HD; 77 SD) were eligible for analysis. Seroconversion to at least 1 of 3 vaccine antigens was present in 78.6% vs 55.8% in HD vs SD vaccine groups (P < .001), respectively. Seroconversions to A/ H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains were 40.5% vs 20.5%, 57.1% vs 32.5%, and 58.3% vs 41.6% in HD vs SD vaccine groups (P = .006, P = .002, P = .028, respectively). Post-immunization geometric mean titers of A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains were significantly higher in the HD group (P = .007, P = .002, P = .033). Independent factors associated with seroconversion to at least 1 vaccine strain were the use of HD vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 3.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56-6.67) and use of mycophenolate doses

Liver transplantation (LT) for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related end-stage liver disease is impaired by universal disease recurrence and suboptimal response to antiviral therapy. Inhibition of angiotensin-II signalling by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARB) decreases hepatic stellate cell activation in vitro and hepatic fibrogenesis in animal models. A single-center retrospective analysis suggested that angiotensin blockade (AB) inhibits fibrosis progression in recurrent HCV post-LT. This study assessed the effect of AB on fibrosis progression in an independent patient cohort.Chart review of all patients who underwent transplantation in our institution for HCV-related ESLD between January 2000 and February 2008 revealed 109 patients with ≥2 protocol liver biopsies and free of antiviral therapy post-LT up to the last biopsy analyzed; 27 of 109 patients were treated with ACE-I/ARB for ≥12 months, 82 were not. Fibrosis was staged using METAVIR.Live-donor LT was more frequent in controls than in the AB group (25% vs 11%; P .05). However, parameters known to affect outcome of recurrent HCV, including donor age, prevalence of diabetes, acute cellular rejection, and immunosuppression, were similar in both groups. Time between first and last biopsy (median, 23 months), stage of fibrosis, fibrosis progression rates (median 0.47 vs 0.45 unit/y; P = .46), and time to develop fibrosis stage ≥2 did not differ between groups. Results held true if deceased-donor LT were analyzed separately.Our study does not support the contention of a previous report that use of AB reduces fibrosis progression in recurrent HCV post-LT.

The increased prevalence of obesity worldwide threatens the pool of living liver donors. Although the negative effects of graft steatosis on liver donation and transplantation are well known, the impact of obesity in the absence of hepatic steatosis on outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is unknown. Consequently, we compared the outcome of LDLT using donors with BMI30 versus donors with BMI ≥30. Between April 2000 and May 2014, 105 patients received a right-lobe liver graft from donors with BMI ≥30, whereas 364 recipients were transplanted with grafts from donors with BMI30. Liver steatosis10% was excluded in all donors with BMI30 by imaging and liver biopsies. None of the donors had any other comorbidity. Donors with BMI30 versus ≥30 had similar postoperative complication rates (Dindo-Clavien ≥3b: 2% vs. 3%; p = 0.71) and lengths of hospital stay (6 vs. 6 days; p = 0.13). Recipient graft function, assessed by posttransplant peak serum bilirubin and international normalized ratio was identical. Furthermore, no difference was observed in recipient complication rates (Dindo-Clavien ≥3b: 25% vs. 20%; p = 0.3) or lengths of hospital stay between groups. We concluded that donors with BMI ≥30, in the absence of graft steatosis, are not contraindicated for LDLT.

Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for end-stage autoimmune liver diseases. However, the underlying disease may recur in the graft in some 20% of cases. The aim of this study is to determine whether LT using living donor grafts from first-degree relatives results in higher rates of recurrence than grafts from more distant/unrelated donors. Two hundred sixty-three patients, who underwent a first LT in the Toronto liver transplant program between January 2000 and March 2015 for autoimmune liver diseases, and had at least 6 months of post-LT follow-up, were included in this study. Of these, 72 (27%) received a graft from a first-degree living-related donor, 56 (21%) from a distant/unrelated living donor, and 135 (51%) from a deceased donor for primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (n = 138, 52%), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) (n = 69, 26%), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) (n = 44, 17%), and overlap syndromes (n = 12, 5%). Recurrence occurred in 52 (20%) patients. Recurrence rates for each autoimmune liver disease were not significantly different after first-degree living-related, living-unrelated, or deceased-donor LT. Similarly, time to recurrence, recurrence-related graft failure, graft survival, and patient survival were not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, first-degree living-related donor LT for PSC, PBC, or AIH is not associated with an increased risk of disease recurrence.

The selection of liver transplant candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) relies mostly on tumor size and number. Instead of relying on these factors, we used poor tumor differentiation and cancer-related symptoms to exclude patients likely to have advanced HCC with aggressive biology. We initially reported similar 5-year survival for patients whose tumors exceeded (M+ group) and were within (M group) the Milan criteria. Herein, we validate our original data with a new prospective cohort and report the long-term follow-up (10-years) using an intention-to-treat analysis. The previously published study (cohort 1) included 362 listed (294 transplanted) patients from January 1996 to August 2008. The validation cohort (cohort 2) includes 243 listed (105 M+ group, 76 beyond University of California San Francisco criteria; 210 transplanted) patients from September 2008 to December 2012. Median follow-up from listing was 59.7 (26.8-103) months. For the validation cohort 2, the actuarial survival from transplant for the M+ group was similar to that of the M group at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years: 94%, 76%, and 69% versus 95%, 82%, and 78% (P = 0.3). For the combined cohorts 1 and 2, there were no significant differences in the 10-year actuarial survival from transplant between groups. On an intention-to-treat basis, the dropout rate was higher in the M+ group and the 5-year and 10-year survival rates from listing were decreased in the M+ group. An alpha-fetoprotein level >500 ng/mL predicted poorer outcomes for both the M and M+ groups. Conclusion Tumor differentiation and cancer-related symptoms of HCC can be used to select patients with advanced HCC who are appropriate candidates for liver transplantation; alpha-fetoprotein level limitations should be incorporated in the listing criteria for patients within or beyond the Milan criteria. (Hepatology 2016;64:2077-2088).

SUMMARY Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection which is often a silent disease has resulted in a global epidemic. The diagnosis of hepatitis C virus often requires confirmation with molecular techniques such as the polymerase chain reaction for detection of HCV RNA. Following laboratory confirmation of the diagnosis, molecular techniques are routinely used to monitor HCV RNA levels, particularly in those undergoing treatment. Unfortunately, molecular tests are relatively expensive and their cost may be prohibitive in the developing world. Several studies have investigated the applicability of the hepatitis C core Ag (HCVcAg), as a substitute for measuring HCV RNA levels. In this review, we provide an overview of the major findings of these studies focused on the utility of measuring HCVcAg antigen levels in the clinical setting. Overall, measuring HCVcAg levels is associated with several advantages and disadvantages. It may be useful in different clinical settings for monitoring HCV patients after obtaining an initial baseline HCV RNA result. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Background & Aims The hepatopulmonary syndrome occurs in up to one-third of patients with cirrhosis. Animal models of this disease suggest that endotoxemia might cause nitric oxide–mediated vascular dilatation that can be inhibited by the antibiotic norfloxacin. We sought to test this hypothesis in humans. Methods We conducted a pilot randomized, controlled crossover trial of norfloxacin 400 mg twice daily for 4 weeks with a 4-week washout period to assess the feasibility of a larger trial. The primary clinical end point was change in alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient (AaDO 2 ). Results Recruitment was challenging, and change in AaDO 2 was highly variable. We recruited 9 adults (1 woman; age, 60 ± 9 years; AaDO 2 , 50 ± 22 mm Hg). AaDO 2 decreased by 0.8 ± 4.8 and 3.4 ± 12.4 mm Hg while on norfloxacin and placebo, respectively ( P = .59). Conclusions Recruitment difficulties and variability of the primary outcome measure suggest the need for a multicenter clinical research network for future therapeutic trials in this disease. There was no major effect of norfloxacin on gas exchange in patients with hepatopulmonary syndrome.

Using our prospectively collected database all adult hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive patients receiving an adult-to-adult LDLT between October 2000 and May 2014 were identified. Outcome of LDLT with grafts from younger (

Many centers require a minimal graft to body weight ratio (GBWR) ≥ 0.8 as an arbitrary threshold to proceed with right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (RL-LDLT), and there is often hesitancy about transplanting lower volume living donor (LD) liver grafts into sicker patients. The data supporting this dogma, based on the early experience with RL-LDLT at Asian centers, are weak. To determine the effect of LD liver volume in the modern era, we investigated the impact of GBWR on the outcome of RL-LDLT with a GBWR as low as 0.6 at the University of Toronto. Between April 2000 and September 2008, 271 adult-to-adult RL-LDLT procedures and 614 deceased donor liver transplants were performed. Twenty-two living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) cases with a GBWR of 0.59 to 0.79 (group A) were compared with 249 LDLT cases with a GBWR ≥ 0.8 (group B) and with 66 full-graft deceased donor liver transplants (group C), who were matched 3:1 according to donor and recipient age, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and presence of hepatitis C and hepatocellular carcinoma with the low-GBWR group. Portal vein shunts were not used. Markers of reperfusion injury [aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT)], graft function (international normalized ratio and bilirubin), complications graded by the Clavien score, and graft and patient survival were compared. As expected, LD recipients had a significantly shorter cold ischemia time (94 ± 43 minutes for A, 96 ± 57 minutes for B, and 453 ± 152 minutes for C, P = 0.0001). However, the peak AST, peak ALT, absolute decrease in the international normalized ratio, day 7 bilirubin level, postoperative creatinine clearance, complication rate graded by the Clavien score, and median hospital stay were similar in all groups. The rate of biliary complications was higher with LD grafts than deceased donor grafts (19% for A versus 10% for B and 0% for C, P = 0.2). Patient survival was similar in all groups at 1, 3, and 5 years (91% for A versus 89% for B and 93% for C at 1 year, 87% for A versus 81% for B and 89% for C at 3 years, and 83% for A versus 81% for B and 87% for C at 5 years, P = 0.63). A Cox proportional regression analysis revealed only hepatitis C virus as a risk factor for poorer graft survival and not GBWR as a continuous or categorical variable. In conclusion, we found no evidence of inferior outcomes with smaller size grafts versus larger size LD grafts or full-size deceased donor grafts. Further studies are warranted to examine the factors affecting the function of smaller grafts for living liver donation and thereby define the safe lower limits for transplantation. Liver Transpl 15:1776–1782, 2009. © 2009 AASLD.

We studied the role of donor and recipient age in transplantation/ischemia-reperfusion injury (TIRI) and short- and long-term graft and patient survival. Eight hundred twenty-two patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation, with 197 donors being ≥60 years old. We evaluated markers of reperfusion injury, graft function, and clinical outcomes as well as short- and long-term graft and patient survival. Increased donor age was associated with more severe TIRI and decreased 3- and 5-year graft survival (73% versus 85% and 72% versus 81%, P < 0.001) and patient survival (77% versus 88% and 77% versus 82%, P < 0.003). Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and recipient age were the only independent risk factors for graft and patient survival in patients receiving an older graft. In the HCV(+) cohort (297 patients), patients ≥ 50 years old who were transplanted with an older graft versus a younger graft had significantly decreased 3- and 5-year graft survival (68% versus 83% and 64% versus 83%, P < 0.009). In contrast, HCV(+) patients < 50 years old had similar 3- and 5-year graft survival if transplanted with either a young graft or an old graft (81% versus 82% and 81% versus 82%, P = 0.9). In conclusion, recipient age and HCV status affect the graft and patient survival of older livers. Combining older grafts with older recipients should be avoided, particularly in HCV(+) patients, whereas the effects of donor age can be minimized in younger recipients. Liver Transpl 15:1288–1295, 2009. © 2009 AASLD.

Hepatitis C recurs universally after liver transplantation (LT). Whether its progression differs after live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is still debated. We retrospectively analyzed 201 consecutive LTs performed at our institution for hepatitis C–related end-stage liver disease between April 2000 and December 2005 (46 LDLTs and 155 DDLTs). Patients were followed with protocol biopsies for medians of 29 (LDLT) and 39 months (DDLT; P = 0.7). Although overall graft and patient survival did not differ, the mean fibrosis stage (Metavir) was significantly higher at 12 to 48 months post-LT (all P 45 years carried a relative risk of 8.17 (confidence interval = 2.6–25.5, P = 0.001) for reaching fibrosis stage 3 or 4 at 2 years post-LT. In conclusion, donor age, rather than the transplant approach, determines the progression of recurrent hepatitis C after LT. LDLT, allowing for the selection of younger donors, may particularly benefit hepatitis C patients. Liver Transpl 14:1778–1786, 2008. © 2008 AASLD.

Characterization of the long-term cancer risks among liver transplant patients has been hampered by the paucity of sufficiently large cohorts. The increase over time in the number of liver transplants coupled with improved survival underscores the need to better understand associated long-term health effects. This is a cohort study whose subjects were assembled with data from the population-based Canadian Organ Replacement Registry. Analyses are based on 2034 patients who received a liver transplant between June 1983 and October 1998. Incident cases of cancer were identified through record linkage to the Canadian Cancer Registry. We compared site-specific cancer incidence rates in the cohort and the general Canadian population by using the standardized incidence ratio (SIR). Stratified analyses were performed to examine variations in risk according to age at transplantation, sex, time since transplantation, and year of transplantation. Liver transplant recipients had cancer incidence rates that were 2.5 times higher than those of the general population [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.1, 3.0]. The highest SIR was observed for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (SIR = 20.8, 95% CI = 14.9, 28.3), whereas a statistically significant excess was observed for colorectal cancer (SIR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.4, 4.4). Risks were more pronounced during the first year of follow-up and among younger transplant patients. In conclusion, our findings indicate that liver transplant patients face increased risks of developing cancer with respect to the general population. Increased surveillance in this patient population, particularly in the first year following transplantation, and screening for colorectal cancer with modalities for which benefits are already well recognized should be pursued.

Many centers are reluctant to use older donors (44 years) for adult right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) due to concerns about possible increased morbidity in donors and poorer outcomes in recipients. Since 2000, 130 adult RLDLTs have been performed at our institution. Recipients were divided into those who received a right lobe graft from a donor/=age 44 (n = 89, 68%; median age 30) and those who received a liver graft from a donor age44 (n = 41, 32%; mean age 52). The two donor and recipient populations had similar demographic and operative profiles. With a median follow-up of 29 months, the severity and number of complications in older donors were similar to those in younger donors. No living donor died. Older donor allografts had initial allograft dysfunction compared to younger donors. Complication rates were similar among recipients in both groups but there was a higher bile duct stricture rate with older donor grafts (27% vs. 12%; p = 0.04). One-year recipient graft survival was 86% for older donors and 85% for younger donors (p = 0.95). Early experience with the use of selected older adults (44 years) for RLDLT is encouraging, but may be associated with a higher rate of biliary complications in the recipient.

Biliary strictures remain the most challenging aspect of adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT). Between 04/2000 and 10/2005, 130 consecutive RLDLTs were performed in our center and followed prospectively. Median follow-up was 23 months (range 3-67) and 1-year graft and patient survival was 85% and 87%, respectively. Overall incidence of biliary leaks (n = 19) or strictures (n = 22) was 32% (41/128) in 33 patients (26%). A duct-to-duct (D-D) or Roux-en-Y (R-Y) anastomosis were performed equally (n = 64 each) with no difference in stricture rate (p = 0.31). The use of ductoplasty increased the number of grafts with a single duct for anastomosis and reduced the biliary complication rate compared to grafts/=2 ducts (17% vs. 46%; p = 0.02). Independent risk factors for strictures included older donor age and previous history of a bile leak. All strictures were managed nonsurgically initially but four patients ultimately required conversion from D-D to R-Y. Ninety-six percent (123/128) of patients are currently free of any biliary complications. D-D anastomosis is safe after RLDLT and provides access for future endoscopic therapy in cases of leak or stricture. When presented with multiple bile ducts, ductoplasty should be considered to reduce the potential chance of stricture.

Liver transplantation (LT) is a successful and well-established therapy for patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD). The reported 1-year survival after LT exceeds 80% for all patient populations.1 However, the number of patients on LT waiting lists exceeds by far the number of available grafts. In most regions, around 20% to 30% of patients will die on the LT waiting list. Therefore, there is an urgent need for novel strategies to increase the donor pool, especially for critically ill patients that urgently require a LT. Live donor LT (LDLT) is an attractive option to overcome this problem.2,3 Live donor LT may provide a faster access to transplantation, shortening LT waiting times and thus, improving overall survival. However, LT outcome in critically ill patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) management, intubation with mechanical ventilation, and often multiorgan failure is controversial.4,5 The increased risk of postoperative mortality of these critically ill patients and the ethical concerns of an urgent donor work-up makes it unclear if LDLT is an appropriate alternative for this patient population. Moreover, many centers are reluctant to even offer LDLT to patients who are hospitalized in the ICU and require mechanical ventilation support.6,7 It has been suggested that patients with decompensated liver disease and high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores should not be considered as candidates for LDLT.8,9 These reports indicate that the risk taken by the live donors exceeds the benefits achieved by the recipients. However, the lack of data in this field limits transplant physicians, our patients, and their potential live donors to make an informed decision about LDLT as an option for critically ill patients. To the best of our knowledge, evidence supporting the use of LDLT to treat decompensated liver disease in patients under mechanical ventilation support and ICU care at the time of transplant is scarce. Herein, we report a single-center experience of LDLT for the treatment of decompensated liver disease in adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation and ICU care at the time of transplant. The outcome of LDLT in critically ill patients was compared to the outcome of patients receiving deceased donor LT (DDLT) under the same circumstances. In this study, we were able to prove that LDLT offers a faster access to transplantation for critically ill patients.

Summary Heme Oxygenase-1 and its product biliverdin/bilirubin have been demonstrated to protect against ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI). We investigated whether increased preoperative bilirubin values of transplant recipients decrease IRI. Preoperative bilirubin levels of live donor liver recipients were correlated to postoperative liver transaminase as a marker of IRI. Additionally, two recipient groups with pretransplant bilirubin levels >24 μmol/l (n = 348) and ≤24 μmol/l (n = 118) were compared. Post-transplant liver function, complications, length of hospital stay, and patient and graft survival were assessed. Preoperative bilirubin levels were negatively correlated to the postoperative increase in transaminases suggesting a protective effect against IRI. The maximal rise of ALT after transplantation in high versus low bilirubin patients was 288 (−210–2457) U/l vs. 375 (−11–2102) U/l, P = 0.006. Bilirubin remained a significant determining factor in a multivariate linear regression analysis. The MELD score and its individual components as a marker of severity of chronic liver disease were significantly higher in the high versus low bilirubin group (P

Background. We evaluated patient characteristics of live donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients undergoing a fast-track protocol without intensive care unit (ICU) admission versus LDLT patients receiving posttransplant ICU care. Methods. Of the 153 LDLT recipients, 46 patients were included in our fast-track protocol without ICU admission. Both, fast-tracked patients and ICU-admitted patients were compared regarding donor and patient characteristics, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes and complications. In a subgroup analysis, we compared fast-tracked patients with patients who were admitted in the ICU for less than 24 hours. Results. Fast-tracked versus ICU patients had a lower model for end-stage liver disease score (13 ± 4 vs 18 ± 7; P < 0.0001), lower preoperative bilirubin levels (51 ± 50 μmol/L vs 119.4 ± 137.3 μmol/L; P < 0.001), required fewer units of packed red blood cells (1.7 ± 1.78 vs 4.4 ± 4; P < 0.0001), and less fresh-frozen plasma (2.7 ± 2 vs 5.8 ± 5; P < 0.0001) during transplantation. Regarding postoperative outcomes, fast-tracked patients presented fewer bacterial infections within 30 days (6.5% [3] vs 29% [28]; P = 0.002), no episodes of pneumonia (0% vs 11.3% [11]; P = 0.02), and less biliary complications within the first year (6% [3] vs 26% [25]; P = 0.001). Also, fast-tracked patients had a shorter posttransplant hospital stay (10.8 ± 5 vs 21.3 ± 29; P = 0.002). In the subgroup analysis, fast-tracked vs ICU patients admitted for less than 24 hours had lower requirements of packed red blood cells (1.7 ± 1.78 vs 3.9 ± 4; P = 0.001) and fresh-frozen plasma (2.7 ± 2 vs 5.8 ± 4.5; P = 0.0001). Conclusions. Fast-track of selected patients after LDLT is safe and feasible. An objective score to perioperatively select LDLT recipients amenable to fast track is yet to be determined.

Background The annual influenza vaccine is recommended for solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTR) although studies have shown suboptimal immunogenicity. Influenza vaccine containing higher dose antigen may lead to greater immunogenicity in this population. Method We conducted a randomized, observer-blind trial comparing the safety and immunogenicity of high dose (HD; FluzoneHD, Sanofi) vs. standard dose (SD; Fluviral, GSK) influenza vaccine in adult SOTR. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive the 2016–2017 influenza vaccine. Preimmunization and 4-week postimmunization sera underwent strain-specific hemagglutination inhibition assay for the three vaccine strains and an additional B strain not included in the vaccine. Result We randomized 172 patients and 161 (84 HD; 77 SD) were eligible for analysis. Median age was 57 years (range 18–86) and time from transplant was 38 (range 3–1402) months. Types of transplant were kidney 67 (39.0%), liver 38 (22.1%), lung 25 (14.5%), heart 23 (13.3%), and combined 19 (11.0%). Seroconversion to at least one of the three vaccine antigens (primary outcome) was present in 78.6% vs. 55.8% in HD vs. SD vaccine, respectively (P < 0.001). Seroconversion to A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains were 40.5% vs. 20.5%, 57.1% vs. 32.5%, and 58.3% vs. 41.6% in HD vs. SD vaccine (P = 0.006, 0.002, 0.028, respectively). Postimmunization geometric mean titers of A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains were significantly higher in the HD group (P = 0.007, 0.002, 0.033). Independent factors associated with seroconversion to at least one vaccine strain were the use of HD vaccine and being on mycophenolate doses less than 2 g daily (P = 0.003, 0.013, respectively). Seroconversion rate to the B strain not included in the trivalent study vaccine was also higher in the HD vaccine group (33.3% vs. 14.1%, P = 0.004). Local and systemic adverse events were similar for the two vaccines. Biopsy-proven rejection was seen in 3.4% vs. 1.2% in HD vs. SD groups, respectively (P = 0.62). Two patients in the SD vaccine group and one in the HD group developed influenza infection during the follow-up. Conclusion High-dose vaccine demonstrated significantly better immunogenicity than SD vaccine in adult transplant recipients and may be the preferred influenza vaccine for this population. Disclosures D. Kumar, Sanofi: Speaker’s Bureau, Speaker honorarium. Pfizer: Speaker’s Bureau, Speaker honorarium. GSK: Grant Investigator, Grant recipient.

To identify prognostic factors after hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). We retrospectively reviewed the combined experience at Toronto General Hospital and Hospital Vall d’Hebron managing HCC recurrence after LT (n = 121) between 2000 and 2012. We analyzed prognostic factors by uni- and multi-variate analysis. Median follow-up from LT was 29.5 (range 2–129.4) months. Median follow-up from HCC recurrence was 12.2 (range 0.1–112.5) months. At recurrence, 31.4 % were treated with curative-intent treatments (surgery or ablation), 42.1 % received palliative treatment, and 26.4 % received best supportive care. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survivals, respectively, after HCC recurrence were 75, 60, and 31 %, vs. 60, 19, and 12 %, vs. 52, 4, and 5 % (p