Comparable Short- and Long-term Outcomes in Living Donor and Deceased Donor Liver Transplantations for Patients With Model for End-stage Liver Disease Scores ≥35 in a Hepatitis-B Endemic Area.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) should be offered to patients with Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores ≥35. BACKGROUND: No data was available to support LDLT of such patients. METHODS: Data of 672 consecutive adult liver transplant recipients from 2005 to 2014 at our center were reviewed. Patients with MELD scores ≥35 were divided into the deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) group and the LDLT group and were compared. Univariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors affecting survival. RESULTS: The LDLT group (n = 54) had younger (33 yrs vs 50 yrs, P < 0.001) and lighter (56 Kg vs 65 Kg, P = 0.004) donors, lighter grafts (627.5 g vs 1252.5 g, P < 0.001), lower graft-weight-to-recipient-standard-liver-volume rates (51.28% vs 99.76%, P < 0.001), shorter cold ischemic time (106.5 min vs 389 min, P < 0.001), and longer operation time (681.5 min vs 534 min, P < 0.001). The groups were comparable in postoperative complication, hospital mortality, and graft survival and patient survival at one year (88.9% vs 92.5%; 88.9% vs 94.7%), three years (87.0% vs 86.9%; 87.0% vs 88.8%), and five years (84.8% vs 81.8%; 84.8% vs 83.3%). Univariate analysis did not show inferior survival in LDLT recipients. CONCLUSIONS: At centers with experience, the outcomes of LDLT can be comparable with those of DDLT even in patients with MELD scores ≥35. When donor risks and recipient benefits are fully considered and balanced, an MELD score ≥35 should not be a contraindication to LDLT. In Hong Kong, where most waitlisted patients have acute-on-chronic liver failure from hepatitis B, LDLT is a wise alternative to DDLT.

Excellent outcomes of liver transplantation using severely steatotic grafts from brain-dead donors.

Liver grafts with macrovesicular steatosis of > 60% are considered unsuitable for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) because of the unacceptably high risk of primary nonfunction (PNF) and graft loss. This study reports our experience in using such grafts from brain-dead donors. Prospectively collected data of DDLT recipient outcomes from 1991 to 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Macrovesicular steatosis > 60% at postperfusion graft biopsy was defined as severe steatosis. In total, 373 patients underwent DDLT. Nineteen patients received severely steatotic grafts (ie, macrovesicular steatosis > 60%), and 354 patients had grafts with ≤ 60% steatosis (control group). Baseline demographics were comparable except that recipient age was older in the severe steatosis group (51 versus 55 years; P = 0.03). Median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 20 in the severe steatosis group and 22 in the control group. Cold ischemia time (CIT) was 384 minutes in the severe steatosis group and 397.5 minutes in the control group (P = 0.66). The 2 groups were similar in duration of stay in the hospital and in the intensive care unit. Risk of early allograft dysfunction (0/19 [0%] versus 1/354 [0.3%]; P>0.99) and 30-day mortality (0/19 [0%] versus 11/354 [3.1%]; P = 0.93) were also similar between groups. No patient developed PNF. The 1-year and 3-year overall survival rates in the severe steatosis group were both 94.7%. The corresponding rates in the control group were 91.8% and 85.8% (P = 0.55). The use of severely steatotic liver grafts from low-risk donors was safe, and excellent outcomes were achieved; however, these grafts should be used with caution, especially in patients with high MELD score. Keeping a short CIT was crucial for the successful use of such grafts in liver transplantation.

Outcomes of endo-radiological approach to management of bile leakage after right lobe living donor liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Bile leakage is a major complication after right lobe living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT). It can result in significant morbidities and, occasionally, mortalities. Endo-radiology is a non-surgical means that has been used to manage this complication. This study reviews the outcomes of the endo-radiological approach to the management of bile leakage after RLDLT with duct-to-duct anastomosis (DDA) at a high-volume center. METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted on all adult patients who received RLDLT at our center between January 2001 and December 2013. There were 496 RLDLTs performed during the study period. Only patients who had DDA as the only bile duct reconstruction method were included in the study. RESULTS: Twelve (3.7%) out of the 328 study subjects developed bile leakage after RLDLT. Six out of these 12 patients were successfully treated with the endo-radiological approach without the need for laparotomy. They had endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with stenting followed by percutaneous drainage of biloma. One of the 12 patients died from recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma 37 months after transplantation. The remaining 11 patients are all alive. CONCLUSION: The endo-radiological approach should be the first-line management for bile leakage for selected patients with DDA as the bile duct reconstruction method.

The friendly incidental portal vein thrombus in liver transplantation.

Improved outcomes have been shown in liver transplantation (LT) with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). However, PVT is still discovered incidentally during surgery despite careful preoperative imaging. Data are limited comparing the outcomes of incidental PVT with PVT diagnosed via preoperative imaging before LT. This study aims to compare the overall outcomes of patients with PVT. From 2008 to 2012, 369 patients had LT, and 58 patients with PVT were identified. They were divided into those with non-PVT (group 0; n = 311), preoperatively identified PVT (group 1; n = 28), and incidental PVT (group 2; n = 30). The demographics, characteristics, preoperative assessment, and postoperative outcomes were compared. A survival analysis was also performed. Baseline characteristics and preoperative evaluations of all 3 groups were comparable (P > 0.05) except for Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, tumor status, platelet levels, and serum bilirubin. A multivariate analysis only showed a high serum bilirubin level to be a predictor of PVT (P = 0.004; odds ratio, 3.395; 95% confidence interval, 1.467-7.861). Postoperative outcomes were also comparable (P > 0.05). Compared to group 2, group 1 had more patients with a Yerdel classification of 3 or 4 with more extensive surgical intervention required (P = 0.02). The survival analysis in all 3 groups was comparable with 5-year survival rate of 87.4%, 84.6%, and 91.8% in group 0, 1, and 2, respectively (P = 0.66). In conclusion, recipients with PVT undergoing LT can have similar outcomes as the non-PVT patients even if PVTs were discovered incidentally. Discovery of incidental PVT only requires thrombectomy with no substantial change of treatment strategy, and the outcome is not adversely affected because most incidental PVTs are of a lower Yerdel grade. Preoperative imaging is useful to identify those with a higher Yerdel grade to allow planning of surgical strategy during transplantation.

Durability of small-for-size living donor allografts.

Our aim was to study the long-term outcomes of living donor liver transplantation using small-for-size (SFS) grafts. From July 2002 to July 2009, 233 patients received a right liver graft with a middle hepatic vein from a living donor in our center. Recipients were stratified according to the graft weight to recipient standard liver volume (GW/SLV) ratio into 4 groups: >50% (n = 89), >40% to 50% (n = 85), >35% to 40% (n = 38), and ≤ 35% (n = 21). They were compared in terms of graft survivals, biliary stricture rates, renal function in terms of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), platelet counts, and graft function in terms of serum bilirubin and international normalized ratio (INR). The 5-year graft survivals for patients with GW/SLV of >50%, >40% to 50%, >35% to 40% and ≤ 35% were 88.8%, 88.2%, 81.5%, and 81.0%, respectively. Transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma affected graft survivals (P = 0.02), but graft size did not (P = 0.66). There were no differences in frequency of biliary stricture (21.3% versus 17.1% versus 21.1% versus 28.6%; P = 0.75). At each year after transplant, their platelet counts (P = 0.12-0.65), eGFR (P = 0.49-0.91), bilirubin (P = 0.14-0.51), and INR (P = 0.20-0.98) remained comparable. SFS grafts with GW/SLV ≤ 35% and >35% to 40% had comparable long-term outcomes with larger liver grafts. Graft size did not affect long-term graft survivals.

Outcomes including liver histology after liver transplantation for chronic hepatitis B using oral antiviral therapy alone.

The outcomes of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatitis after liver transplantation (LT) without hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) is not well documented. This study aims to determine the outcomes of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients using an HBIG-free regimen. All biopsies performed 3 months or more after LT in consecutive CHB patients transplanted from 2003 to 2012 were reviewed. None of the patients received HBIG. Results of all liver histologies were reviewed to determine the cause of graft dysfunction. Of the 435 patients transplanted during this period, 263 liver biopsies were performed in 144 patients. Thirty-six patients were positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) with undetectable HBV DNA at the time of biopsy, and none had histological evidence of HBV infection. Of the 263 biopsies, 44 (17%) had evidence of fibrosis. There was a significantly higher rate of fibrosis in those with large duct obstruction compared to those without (51% versus 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Of the 291 patients without a liver biopsy during the same period, 43 were HBsAg+. Seven patients had evidence of virological rebound, of whom 6 had evidence of rtM204V/I mutation and 1 had recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma with low-level rebound and wild-type virus. In conclusion, for patients without virological rebound, positive serum HBsAg was not associated with histological evidence of HBV-related hepatitis after LT. To prevent virological rebound, nucleos(t)ide analogues with higher barriers to resistance should be used.

Clinical factors affecting rejection rates in liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: With improvements in survival, liver transplant recipients now suffer more morbidity from long-term immunosuppression. Considerations were given to develop individualized immunosuppression based on their risk of rejection. METHOD: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 788 liver transplants performed during the period from October 1991 to December 2011 to study the relationship between acute cellular rejection (ACR) and various clinical factors. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that older age (P=0.04, OR=0.982), chronic hepatitis B virus infection (P=0.005, OR= 0.574), living donor liver transplantation (P=0.02, OR=0.648) and use of interleukin-2 receptor antagonist on induction (P<0.001, OR=0.401) were associated with fewer ACRs. Patients with fulminant liver failure (P=0.004, OR=4.05) were more likely to develop moderate to severe grade ACR. CONCLUSIONS: Liver transplant recipients with older age, chronic hepatitis B virus infection, living donor liver transplantation and use of interleukin-2 receptor antagonist on induction have fewer ACR. Patients transplanted for fulminant liver failure are at higher risk of moderate to severe grade ACR. These results provide theoretical framework for developing individualized immunosuppression.

Radiofrequency ablation versus transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable solitary hepatocellular carcinomas sized 5-8 cm.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective review was conducted to compare the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with that of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in treating large (5-8 cm) unresectable solitary hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). METHODS: Patients with large unresectable solitary HCCs primarily treated by RFA or TACE were reviewed. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were tumour response, time to disease progression, and treatment-related morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: There were 15 patients in the RFA group. Of these, 12 achieved complete ablation, one had ablation site recurrence, and five developed complications. Median disease-free survival in this group was 13.0 months (range: 2.8-38.0 months). The TACE group included 26 patients, of whom four obtained a partial response, none achieved a complete response, and five developed complications. The median time to disease progression in this group was 8.0 months (range: 1.0-68.0 months). There were no hospital deaths in this series. Median survival was 39.8 months in the RFA group and 19.8 months in the TACE group (P = 0.257). Rates of 1-, 2- and 5-year survival were 93.3%, 86.2% and 20.9%, respectively, in the RFA group and 73.1%, 40.6% and 18.3%, respectively, in the TACE group. CONCLUSIONS: Both RFA and TACE are feasible treatments for large unresectable solitary HCCs. Both modes show comparable rates of complications and longterm survival, but RFA achieves better initial tumour control and results in better short-term survival.

A retrospective study on risk factors associated with failed endoscopic treatment of biliary anastomotic stricture after right-lobe living donor liver transplantation with duct-to-duct anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE: This aim of this study is to determine the risk factors in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). BACKGROUND: Endoscopic treatment is considered the first-line intervention for biliary anastomotic stricture (BAS) after right-lobe living donor liver transplantation with duct-to-duct anastomosis. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 287 patients who received right-lobe living donor liver transplantation with duct-to-duct anastomosis. The morphology of BAS was defined according to the shape of the distal side of duct-to-duct anastomosis shown on cholangiogram and was categorized into 3 types: pouched, intermediately pouched, and triangular. All cases of ERC were performed by operating surgeons. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (20.6%) had BAS and received ERC and balloon dilatation with or without stenting. The success rate was 73.2%. The median number of sessions needed for successful ERC was 3. In the 15 patients with failed ERC, 4 were successfully treated with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and balloon dilatation and 11 underwent conversion hepaticojejunostomy (6 had external percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage as a temporizing measure). On multivariate analysis, recipient age [odds ratio (OR): 0.922; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85-1.00; P = 0.049], operation time (OR: 1.007; 95% CI: 1.001-1.013; P = 0.025), and morphology of stricture (OR: 6.722; 95% CI: 1.31-34.48; P = 0.022) were independent risk factors associated with failed ERC. The success rates for the 3 types of BAS-pouched, intermediately pouched, and triangular-were 42.9%, 63.6%, and 88.9%, respectively (P = 0.021). Association was found between bile leak and pouched BAS (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: ERC is highly effective in treating BAS. A success rate of 73%, the highest ever reported, has been achieved. Morphology of stricture is associated with outcome of ERC. Radiological or surgical intervention should be considered for patients with pouched BAS after endoscopic treatment fails for the first time.

Pilot study of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation as a bridging therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma patients wait-listed for liver transplantation.

The objective of this study was to investigate the outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation as a bridging therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had been wait-listed for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Adult patients with unresectable and unablatable HCCs within the University of California San Francisco criteria who had been wait-listed for DDLT were screened for their suitability for HIFU ablation as a bridging therapy if they were not suitable for transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Treatment outcomes for patients receiving HIFU ablation, TACE, and best medical treatment (BMT) were compared. Fifty-one patients were included in the analysis. Before the introduction of HIFU ablation, only 39.2% of the patients had received bridging therapy (TACE only, n = 20). With HIFU ablation in use, the rate increased dramatically to 80.4% (TACE + HIFU, n = 41). The overall dropout rate was 51% (n = 26). Patients in the BMT group had a significantly higher dropout rate (P = 0.03) and significantly poorer liver function as reflected by higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores and higher Child-Pugh grading. Clinically relevant ascites was found in 5 patients in the HIFU group and 2 patients in the BMT group, but none was found in the TACE group (P = 0.01 and P = 0.03, respectively). The TACE and HIFU groups had comparable percentages of tumor necrosis in excised livers (P = 0.35), and both were significantly higher than that in the BMT group (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively). In conclusion, HIFU ablation was safe even for HCC patients with Child-Pugh C disease. Its adoption increased the percentage of patients receiving bridging therapy from 39.2% to 80.4%. A randomized controlled trial for further validation of its efficacy is warranted.

Low-volume deceased donor liver transplantation alongside a strong living donor liver transplantation service.

BACKGROUND: At our center, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the main workload supported by a strong, mature service. Deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is performed but in small volume. This study aimed to review the results of a low-volume DDLT service alongside a strong LDLT service. METHODS: Consecutive DDLTs for adults performed from 1991 to 2009 were reviewed. The 1st to the 50th DDLTs were categorized as Era I cases, and the rest were Era II cases. The outcomes of the DDLTs were analyzed and compared with those achieved overseas. RESULTS: Eras I and II consisted of 59 and 183 DDLTs, respectively. All donors were brain-dead and heart-beating with a median age of 49 years (range 7-76 years). Among the 242 DDLTS, 30.2 % were on a high-urgency basis and 15.3 % were for hepatocellular carcinoma. The patients had a median model for end-stage liver disease score of 21 (range 6-40), and most (67.8 %) were hepatitis B virus carriers. Before transplantation, 16.1 % of the patients were in the intensive care unit and 30.2 % were in the hospital. The hospital mortality rate dropped from 13.6 % (8/59) during Era I to 3.8 % (7/183) during Era II (p = 0.012). For Era I, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 84.7, 79.7, and 76.3 %, respectively, which improved to 92.9, 89.0 and 87.2 % for Era II (p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The recipient survival of this series compares favorably with contemporary series. It is shown that a low-volume DDLT service alongside a strong LDLT service can have excellent results.

Samaritan donor interchange in living donor liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In order to overcome ABO blood group incompatibility, paired donor interchange has been practised in living donor liver transplantation. Liver transplantations using grafts donated by Samaritan living donors have been performed in Europe, North America, South Korea, and Hong Kong. Such practice is clearly on strong biological grounds although social and psychological implications could be far-reaching. Local experience has been satisfactory but is still limited. As few centers have this arrangement, its safety and viability are still being assessed under a clinical trial setting. METHODS: Here we report a donor interchange involving an ABO-compatible pair with a universal donor and an ABO-incompatible pair with a universal recipient. This matching was not only a variation but also an extension of the donor interchange scheme. RESULTS: The four operations (two donor hepatectomies and two recipient operations) were successful. All the two donors and the two recipients recovered well. Such donor interchange further supports the altruistic principle of organ donation in contrast to exchange for a gain. CONCLUSIONS: Samaritan donor interchange certainly taxes further the ethical challenge of donor interchange. Although this practice has obvious biological advantages, such advantages have to be weighed against the potential increase in potential psychological risks to the subjects in the interchange. Further ethical and clinical evaluations of local and overseas experiences of donor interchange should guide future clinical practice in utilizing this potential organ source for transplantation.

Good longterm survival after primary living donor liver transplantation for solitary hepatocellular carcinomas up to 8 cm in diameter.

OBJECTIVES: There is controversy over whether hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) should be primarily treated with living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) if liver resection (LR) can be effective. This retrospective study was conducted to compare survival outcomes in patients treated with either modality for solitary HCC measuring ≤8 cm in diameter. METHODS: Outcomes in patients with solitary HCC primarily treated by LDLT were analysed. Patients with solitary HCC of similar sizes with or without microvascular invasion primarily treated with LR were selected at a ratio of 6 : 1 for comparison. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality amounted to 0% and 1.3% in the LDLT (n = 50) and LR (n = 300) groups, respectively (P = 0.918). Complication rates were 34% and 20% in the LDLT and LR groups, respectively (P = 0.027). Rates of 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year overall survival were 98%, 94%, 89% and 83%, respectively, in the LDLT group and 95%, 85%, 76% and 56%, respectively, in the LR group (P = 0.013). Rates of 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year disease-free survival were 96%, 90%, 87% and 81%, respectively, in the LDLT group and 81%, 64%, 57% and 40%, respectively, in the LR group (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Living donor liver transplantation surpassed LR in survival outcomes, achieving a 10-year overall survival rate 1.5 times as high and a 10-year disease-free survival rate twice as high as those facilitated by LR. However, it entailed more complications, in addition to the inevitable risks to the donor.

Oral nucleoside/nucleotide analogs without hepatitis B immune globulin after liver transplantation for hepatitis B.

OBJECTIVES: The long-term outcomes of oral antiviral therapy without hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) in prevention of reinfection with hepatitis B after liver transplantation are not known. We aimed to determine the long-term outcomes from a large population of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) liver transplant recipients using oral antiviral therapy alone. METHODS: A total of 362 consecutive CHB patients transplanted from January 2003 to May 2011 were included. None of the patients received HBIG. Viral serology, viral load, and liver biochemistry were performed at regular intervals during follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 362 patients, 176 (49%), 142 (39%), and 44 (12%) were on lamivudine (LAM), entecavir (ETV), and combination therapy (predominantly LAM+adefovir), respectively, at the time of transplant. The median follow-up length was 53 months. The rate of hepatitis B surface antigen seronegativity and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA suppression to undetectable levels at 8 years was 88 and 98%, respectively. The virological relapse rates (>1 log increase IU/ml) at 1, 3, 5, and 8 years was 5, 10, 13 and 16%, respectively. The virological relapse rate at 3 years for LAM, ETV, and combination group was 17, 0, and 7%, respectively (P<0.001). Forty-two patients had virological relapse, of which 36 had YMDD mutation (31 in the LAM group and 5 in the combination group). The overall 8-year survival was 83%, with no difference between the three treatment groups (P=0.94). No mortality from HBV recurrence occurred in the 362 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Oral nucleoside/nucleotide analogs without HBIG are effective in preventing graft loss secondary to hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation. However, new agents with a high barrier to resistance should be used to minimize drug resistance and to prevent virological rebound.

Outcomes of side-to-side conversion hepaticojejunostomy for biliary anastomotic stricture after right-liver living donor liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Conversion hepaticojejunostomy is considered the salvage intervention for biliary anastomotic stricture, a common complication of right-liver living donor liver transplantation with duct-to-duct anastomosis, after failed endoscopic treatment. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of side-to-side hepaticojejunostomy with those of end-to-side hepaticojejunostomy. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of 402 adult patients who had undergone right-liver living donor liver transplantation with duct-to-duct anastomosis were reviewed. Diagnosis of biliary anastomotic stricture was made based on clinical, biochemical, histological and radiological results. Endoscopic treatment was the first-line treatment of biliary anastomotic stricture. RESULTS: Interventional radiological or endoscopic treatment failed to correct the biliary anastomotic stricture in 13 patients, so they underwent conversion hepaticojejunostomy. Ten of them received end-to-side hepaticojejunostomy and three received side-to-side hepaticojejunostomy. In the end-to-side group, two patients sustained hepatic artery injury requiring repeated microvascular anastomosis, two developed re-stenosis requiring further percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and balloon dilatation, and two required revision hepaticojejunostomy. In the side-to-side group, one patient developed re-stenosis requiring further endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and balloon dilatation. No re-operation was needed in this group. Otherwise, outcomes in the two groups were similar in terms of liver function and graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similar outcomes, side-to-side hepaticojejunostomy may be a better option for bile duct reconstruction after failed interventional radiological or endoscopic treatment because it can decrease the chance of hepatic artery injury and allows future endoscopic treatment if re-stricture develops. However, more large-scale studies are warranted to validate the results.

Retrohepatic vena cava deroofing in living donor liver transplantation for caudate hepatocellular carcinoma.

The removal of tumor together with the native liver in living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma is challenged by a very close resection margin if the tumor abuts the inferior vena cava. This is in contrast to typical deceased donor liver transplantation where the entire retrohepatic inferior vena cava is included in total hepatectomy. Here we report a case of deroofing the retrohepatic vena cava in living donor liver transplantation for caudate hepatocellular carcinoma. In order to ensure clear resection margins, the anterior portion of the inferior vena cava was included. The right liver graft was inset into a Dacron vascular graft on the back table and the composite graft was then implanted to the recipient inferior vena cava. Using this technique, we observed the no-touch technique in tumor removal, hence minimizing the chance of positive resection margin as well as the chance of shedding of tumor cells during manipulation in operation.

Recurrence of hepatocellular cancer after liver transplantation: the role of primary resection and salvage transplantation in East and West.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Greater tumor aggressiveness and different management modalities of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) before liver transplantation (LT) may explain the higher recurrence rates reported in Asia. This study investigates the prognostic factors for HCC recurrence in a Western and an Eastern HCC patient cohort in order to analyze the respective roles of tumor- and management-related factors on the incidence of post-LT HCC recurrence. METHODS: Data of 273 HCC patients, transplanted during the period January 1999-March 2009, were obtained from the Rome Inter-University Liver Transplant Consortium (n=157) and Hong Kong University (n=116) databases. Median follow-up was 4.3 years (range: 0.2-12). Recurrence rate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on the entire population and on Milan criteria-in (MC-in) patients. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis on the entire population identified four independent risk factors for post-LT HCC recurrence: microvascular invasion (odds ratio, OR=4.88; p=0.001), poor tumor grading (OR=6.86; p=0.002), diameter of the largest tumor (OR=4.72; p=0.05), and previous liver resection (LR) (OR=3.34; p=0.04). After removal of LR, only tumor-related variables were independent risk factors for recurrence. When only MC-in patients were analyzed, no difference was observed between the two cohorts in terms of recurrence rate after LR patient removal. CONCLUSIONS: LR followed by salvage "for HCC recurrence" LT represents the main reason for a higher HCC recurrence rate in the Hong Kong patients, but not LR followed by salvage "for liver failure" LT in the Roman group. This approach towards HCC before LT may not be universally applicable. The precise patient background must be taken into account in order to identify the best pre-LT strategy.

Entecavir monotherapy is effective in suppressing hepatitis B virus after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated the efficacy of entecavir, a cyclopentyl guanosine nucleoside analogue, as monoprophylaxis in patients with chronic hepatitis B who received a liver transplant. METHODS: We studied data from 80 consecutive patients who received a liver transplant (47 from living donors and 33 from deceased donors) for hepatitis B-related disease and entecavir monotherapy as prophylaxis. None of the patients received hepatitis B immunoglobulin. Indications for transplant included decompensation from cirrhosis (27.5%), acute-on-chronic hepatitis B (47.5%), and hepatocellular carcinoma (25%). The median follow-up time was 26 months (range, 5-40 months). Before transplant, 33 patients were not on antiviral therapy and 47 were on oral therapy (18 had received less than 3 months of treatment). RESULTS: At the time of transplant, the median log HBV DNA level was 3.5 copies/mL (range, 1.54-8.81); 21 patients (26%) had undetectable levels of HBV DNA. The cumulative rate of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) loss was 86% and 91% after 1 and 2 years, respectively. Ten patients had reappearance of HBsAg. Eighteen patients (22.5%) were HBsAg positive at the time of their last examination; 17 of these had undetectable levels of HBV DNA, and the remaining patient had a low level of HBV DNA (217 copies/mL). There was no evidence of mutations at sites that confer resistance to entecavir among patients who were HBsAg positive. CONCLUSIONS: Although only 26% of patients had complete viral suppression at the time of transplant, 91% lost HBsAg, with 98.8% achieving undetectable levels of HBV DNA. A hepatitis B immunoglobulin-free regimen of entecavir monotherapy is effective after liver transplantation for chronic hepatitis B.

Outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for patients with preoperative type 1 hepatorenal syndrome and acute hepatic decompensation.

This study investigated the outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with preoperative type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and acute hepatic decompensation. Prospectively collected data for 104 patients who had fulminant hepatic failure, acute decompensation of cirrhosis, or an acute flare of chronic hepatitis B were analyzed. Thirty-three patients (31.7%) had HRS (the HRS group), and 71 patients (68.3%) did not (the non-HRS group). The median follow-up period was 60 months. The HRS group had significantly more preoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (84.8% versus 60.6%, P = 0.01), worse preoperative blood test results (creatinine, 248 versus 88 µmol/L, P < 0.001; total bilirubin, 630 versus 555 µmol/L, P = 0.001), more hemodialysis (48.5% versus 0%, P < 0.001), more blood transfusions (9 versus 4 U, P < 0.001), longer postoperative ICU stays (8 versus 4 days, P < 0.001), worse postoperative blood test results (creatinine at 1 year, 108 versus 96 µmol/L, P = 0.006), and poorer overall survival (P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, only HRS was associated with poorer overall survival (hazard ratio = 8.592, 95% confidence interval = 1.782-41.431, P = 0.007). In conclusion, HRS patients had worse postoperative renal function and overall survival than non-HRS patients. However, their 5-year overall survival rate was still nearly 80%, which is satisfactory. Therefore, LDLT can be considered for patients who have acute hepatic decompensation with or without HRS.

Increasing the recipient benefit/donor risk ratio by lowering the graft size requirement for living donor liver transplantation.

In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), a right liver graft is larger than a left liver graft and hence leads to better recipient survival. However, in comparison with donor left hepatectomy, donor right hepatectomy carries a higher donor risk. We estimated the expansion of the applicability of left liver living donor liver transplantation (LLDLT) by lowering the graft weight (GW)/standard liver volume (SLV) ratio in increments of 5%. Consecutive LDLT cases were included in this study. The results of computed tomography volumetry provided the graft volume measurements, and the GW was derived from the graft volume with the conversion factor of 1.19 mL/g. We tried to estimate how many more times LLDLT would have been feasible if the GW/SLV requirement had been lowered to 40%, 35%, 30%, or 25%. In all, 361 consecutive donor-recipient pairs underwent LDLT. Right liver living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) accounted for 95% of the LDLT cases. Most recipients were male (74.2%), and most donors were female (60.4%). The median GW/SLV ratio was 46% (47% for RLDLT and 37% for LLDLT, P < 0.001). Two of the 218 female donors donated the left liver, and 12 of the 93 female recipients received a left liver. In 147 of the 173 cases (85%) when the donor was female and the recipient was male, the GW/SLV ratio did not reach 30%. LLDLT could have been performed more often than 5% of the time if a lower GW/SLV requirement had been adopted. With GW/SLV ratios ≥ 40%, ≥ 35%, ≥ 30%, and ≥ 25%, the proportion of LLDLT cases would have risen from 5% to 5.8%, 12.5%, 29.1%, and 62.3%, respectively. LLDLT could have been performed approximately twice as often with every 5% reduction of the GW/SLV requirement. In conclusion, lowering the graft size requirement could improve the applicability of LLDLT and hence reduce donor risk.