Risks of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis After Liver Transplantation.

Biliary complications are common after liver transplantation (LT). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the preferred method to treat biliary complications. Nevertheless, ERCP is not without complications and may have a greater complication rate in the LT population. Knowledge of the prevalence, severity, and possible risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in LT recipients is limited. Therefore, this study aims to determine the incidence and severity of PEP and identify potential risk factors in LT recipients. This retrospective cohort included patients ≥18 years who underwent ≥1 ERCP procedures after LT between January 2010 and October 2021. Two hundred thirty-two patients were included, who underwent 260 LTs and 1125 ERCPs. PEP occurred after 23 ERCP procedures (2%) with subsequent mortality in three (13%). Multivariate logistic regression identified wire cannulation of the pancreatic duct as a significant risk factor for PEP (OR, 3.21). The complication rate of PEP after LT in this study was shown to be low and is lower compared to patients without a history of LT. Nevertheless, the mortality rate of this group of patients was notably higher.

Type of calcineurin inhibitor and long-term outcomes following liver transplantation in patients with primary biliary cholangitis - an ELTR study.

Background & Aims: Tacrolimus has been associated with recurrence of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) after liver transplantation (LT), which in turn may reduce survival. This study aimed to assess the association between the type of calcineurin inhibitor used and long-term outcomes following LT in patients with PBC. Methods: Survival analyses were used to assess the association between immunosuppressive drugs and graft or patient survival among adult patients with PBC in the European Liver Transplant Registry. Patients who received a donation after brain death graft between 1990 and 2021 with at least 1 year of event-free follow-up were included. Results: In total, 3,175 patients with PBC were followed for a median duration of 11.4 years (IQR 5.9-17.9) after LT. Tacrolimus (Tac) was registered in 2,056 (64.8%) and cyclosporin in 819 (25.8%) patients. Following adjustment for recipient age, recipient sex, donor age, and year of LT, Tac was not associated with higher risk of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.07, 95% CI 0.92-1.25, p = 0.402) or death (aHR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90-1.24, p = 0.473) over cyclosporin. In this model, maintenance mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was associated with a lower risk of graft loss (aHR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.87, p <0.001) or death (aHR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87, p <0.001), while these risks were higher with use of steroids (aHR 1.31, 95% CI 1.13-1.52, p <0.001, and aHR 1.34, 95% CI 1.15-1.56, p <0.001, respectively). Conclusions: In this large LT registry, type of calcineurin inhibitor was not associated with long-term graft or recipient survival, providing reassurance regarding the use of Tac post LT in the population with PBC. Patients using MMF had a lower risk of graft loss and death, indicating that the threshold for combination treatment with Tac and MMF should be low. Impact and implications: This study investigated the association between immunosuppressive drugs and the long-term survival of patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) following donation after brain death liver transplantation. While tacrolimus has previously been related to a higher risk of PBC recurrence, the type of calcineurin inhibitor was not related to graft or patient survival among patients transplanted for PBC in the European Liver Transplant Registry. Additionally, maintenance use of mycophenolate was linked to lower risks of graft loss and death, while these risks were higher with maintenance use of steroids. Our findings should provide reassurance for physicians regarding the continued use of Tac after liver transplantation in the population with PBC, and suggest potential benefit from combination therapy with mycophenolate.

Long-term outcomes after hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion and transplantation of 1,202 donor livers in a real-world setting (HOPE-REAL study).

BACKGROUND & AIM: We aimed to assess long-term outcome after transplantation of HOPE-treated donor livers based on real-world data (i.e., IDEAL-D stage 4). METHODS: In this international, multicentre, observational cohort study, we collected data from adult recipients of a HOPE-treated liver transplanted between January 2012 and December 2021. Analyses were stratified for brain-dead (DBD) and circulatory-dead (DCD) donor livers, sub-divided by their respective risk categories. The primary outcome was death-censored graft survival. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of primary non-function (PNF) and ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). RESULTS: We report on 1202 liver transplantations (64% DBD) performed at 22 European centres. For DBD, a total number of 99 benchmark (8%), 176 standard (15%), and 493 extended-criteria (41%) cases were included. For DCD, 117 transplants were classified as low-risk (10%), 186 as high-risk (16%), and 131 as futile (11%), with significant risk profile variations among centres. Actuarial 1-, 3-, and 5-year death-censored graft survival for DBD and DCD was 95%, 92%, and 91%, vs. 92%, 87%, and 81%, respectively (logrank p=0.003). Within DBD and DCD-strata, death-censored graft survival was similar among risk groups (logrank p=0.26, p=0.99). Graft loss due to PNF or IC was 2.3% and 0.4% (DBD), and 5% and 4.1% (DCD). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows excellent 5-year survival after transplantation of HOPE-treated DBD and DCD livers with low rates of graft loss due to PNF or IC, irrespective of their individual risk profile. HOPE-treatment has now reached IDEAL-D stage 4, which further supports the implementation of HOPE in routine clinical practice. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates the excellent long-term performance of HOPE-treatment of DCD and DBD liver grafts irrespective of their individual risk profile in a real-world setting, outside the evaluation of randomized controlled trials. While previous studies have established safety, feasibility, and efficacy against the current standard, according to the IDEAL-D evaluation framework, HOPE-treatment has now reached the final IDEAL-D Stage 4, which further supports the implementation of HOPE in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05520320.

Benefits and barriers to accreditation of HPB center and fellowship programs in Europe: a strength-weakness-opportunity-and-threats (SWOT) analysis by an E-AHPBA-ESSO-UEMS ad hoc working committee.

BACKGROUND: Training in HPB surgery lacks uniformity across regions covered by the E-AHPBA. Accreditation has been in place for centers and fellowship programs, but with low uptake. The decision whether to continue, change or cease such accreditation is being discussed. Thus, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted. METHODS: A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study among stakeholders in E-AHPBA, ESSO and UEMS under the E-AHPBA executive council was founded, ensuring representation by gender and geographic distribution. RESULTS: Responses were collected from across E-AHPBA regions, with response from 15 of 24 subchapters. The most frequent and recurring themes are presented in a SWOT matrix which allows for paired evaluations of factors deemed to be helpful (Strengths and Opportunities), those that are harmful (Weaknesses and Threats). CONCLUSION: This study identified both helpful and harmful effects to an accreditation process of HPB centers or HPB fellowship training across the E-AHPBA membership region. Formal accreditation of centers is not within the scope, nor jurisdiction nor financial capacity for E-AHPBA in the current situation. A strong interest in formal HPB training should be capitalized into E-AHPBA strategic planning towards a structured accreditation system for HPB fellowship programs or HPB training tracks.

Harmonizing Definitions and Perspectives in Extreme Liver Surgery: A Delphi Experts Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To propose to our community a common language about extreme liver surgery. BACKGROUND: The lack of a clear definition of extreme liver surgery prevents convincing comparisons of results among centers. METHODS: We used a two-round Delphi methodology to quantify consensus among liver surgery experts. For inclusion in the final recommendations, we established a consensus when the positive responses (agree and totally agree) exceeded 70%. The study steering group summarized and reported the recommendations. In general, a five-point Likert scale with a neutral central value was used, and in a few cases multiple choices. Results are displayed as numbers and percentages. RESULTS: A two-round Delphi study was completed by 38 expert surgeons in complex hepatobiliary surgery. The surgeon´s median age was 58 years old (52-63) and the median years of experience was 25 years (20-31). For the proposed definitions of total vascular occlusion, hepatic flow occlusion and inferior vein occlusion, the degree of agreement was 97%, 81% and 84%, respectively. In situ approach (64%) was the preferred, followed by ante situ (22%) and ex situ (14%). Autologous or cadaveric graft for hepatic artery or hepatic vein repair were the most recommended (89%). The use of veno-venous bypass or portocaval shunt revealed the divergence depending on the case. Overall, 75% of the experts agreed with the proposed definition for extreme liver surgery. CONCLUSION: Obtaining a consensus on the definition of extreme liver surgery is essential to guarantee the correct management of patients with highly complex hepatobiliary oncological disease. The management of candidates for extreme liver surgery involves comprehensive care ranging from adequate patient selection to the appropriate surgical strategy.

Older living liver donors can enlarge the donor pool: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the best option for end-stage liver disease patients. Older potential donors are increasingly requesting donation. This study aims to systematically assess the differences in donor perioperative and postoperative complications, mortality, and quality of life (QoL) between younger and older living liver donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Embase, Medline, and Cochrane were searched for studies published between 2002 and 2 June 2023. Donor complications, major complications, biliary complications, mortality, and QoL were systematically reviewed, including meta-analyses. Donors aged >50 years were considered older. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment Scale. RESULTS: The search yielded 8320 studies, of which 17 were included. The risk ratio (RR) for complications in younger donors was 1.08 [0.90-1.31] ( P =0.41). RRs for major complications in younger donors were 0.98 [0.64, 1.48] and 0.89 [0.50, 1.57] using Clavien-Dindo ≥III and ≥IIIb as major complication. RR for biliary complications in younger donors was 1.59 [1.05-2.42] ( P =0.03). Mortality rate in younger donors was 47/13 238 (0.4%) and in older donors 13/989 (1.3%). Physical component summary (PCS) in younger donors was 51.87 and in older donors 51.29. Mental component summary (MCS) in younger donors was 52.93 and in older donors 55.40. CONCLUSION: Older donors do not have a higher complication or mortality rate than younger donors after LDLT. They may have a lower rate of biliary complications. Additionally, older donors have a similar QoL after LDLT. With careful selection, older donors can be included in screening programs for living liver donation to expand the donor pool.

Biliary complications after adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation: An international multicenter study of 3633 cases.

In living-donor liver transplantation, biliary complications including bile leaks and biliary anastomotic strictures remain significant challenges, with incidences varying across different centers. This multicentric retrospective study (2016-2020) included 3633 adult patients from 18 centers and aimed to identify risk factors for these biliary complications and their impact on patient survival. Incidences of bile leaks and biliary strictures were 11.4% and 20.6%, respectively. Key risk factors for bile leaks included multiple bile duct anastomoses (odds ratio, [OR] 1.8), Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (OR, 1.4), and a history of major abdominal surgery (OR, 1.4). For biliary anastomotic strictures, risk factors were ABO incompatibility (OR, 1.4), blood loss >1 L (OR, 1.4), and previous abdominal surgery (OR, 1.7). Patients experiencing biliary complications had extended hospital stays, increased incidence of major complications, and higher comprehensive complication index scores. The impact on graft survival became evident after accounting for immortal time bias using time-dependent covariate survival analysis. Bile leaks and biliary anastomotic strictures were associated with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.7 and 1.8 for graft survival, respectively. The study underscores the importance of minimizing these risks through careful donor selection and preoperative planning, as biliary complications significantly affect graft survival, despite the availability of effective treatments.

The Yield of Routine Post-Operative Doppler Ultrasound to Detect Early Post-Liver Transplantation Vascular Complications.

Early detection of liver transplantation (LT) vascular complications enables timely management. Our aim was to assess if routine Doppler ultrasound (rDUS) improves the detection of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and hepatic venous outflow obstruction (HVOO). We retrospectively analysed timing and outcomes, number needed to diagnose one complication (NND) and positive predictive value (PPV) of rDUS on post-operative day (POD) 0,1 and 7 in 708 adult patients who underwent primary LT between 2010-2022. We showed that HAT developed in 7.1%, PVT in 8.2% and HVOO in 3.1% of patients. Most early complications were diagnosed on POD 0 (26.9%), 1 (17.3%) and 5 (17.3%). rDUS correctly detected 21 out of 26 vascular events during the protocol days. PPV of rDUS was 53.8%, detection rate 1.1% and NND was 90.5. Median time to diagnosis was 4 days for HAT and 47 days for PVT and 21 days for HVOO. After intervention, liver grafts were preserved in 57.1%. In conclusion, rDUS protocol helps to detect first week's vascular events, but with low PPV and a high number of ultrasounds needed.

Quantifying the Disadvantage of Small Recipient Size on the Liver Transplantation Waitlist, a Longitudinal Analysis Within the Eurotransplant Region.

BACKGROUND: Small adult patients with end-stage liver disease waitlisted for liver transplantation may face a shortage of size-matched liver grafts. This may result in longer waiting times, increased waitlist removal, and waitlist mortality. This study aims to assess access to transplantation in transplant candidates with below-average bodyweight throughout the Eurotransplant region. METHODS: Patients above 16 y of age listed for liver transplantation between 2010 and 2015 within the Eurotransplant region were eligible for inclusion. The effect of bodyweight on chances of receiving a liver graft was studied in a Cox model corrected for lab-Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score updates fitted as time-dependent variable, blood type, listing for malignant disease, and age. A natural spline with 3 degrees of freedom was used for bodyweight and lab-MELD score to correct for nonlinear effects. RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, the percentage of transplanted, delisted, and deceased waitlisted patients was 49.1%, 17.9%, and 24.3% for patients with a bodyweight <60 kg (n = 1267) versus 60.1%, 15.1%, and 18.6% for patients with a bodyweight ≥60 kg (n = 10 520). To reach comparable chances for transplantation, 60-kg and 50-kg transplant candidates are estimated to need, respectively, up to 2.8 and 4.0 more lab-MELD points than 80-kg transplant candidates. CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing bodyweight was significantly associated with decreased chances to receive a liver graft. This resulted in substantially longer waiting times, higher delisting rates, and higher waitlist mortality for patients with a bodyweight <60 kg.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis and other risk factors for post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease after liver transplantation in adults.

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is a rare but serious complication of liver transplantation (LT) with morbidity and mortality. The risk factors for PTLD in adults are ill-defined. This study aimed to assess the risk factors for PTLD after LT in adults. All adult LT recipients between 1986 and 2016 from 2 centers in the Netherlands were included, with follow-up until 2020. PTLD was diagnosed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Potential risk factors for PTLD were assessed using multivariate Cox regression analysis. A total of 1281 patients were included, of whom 29 (2.3%) developed PTLD. Results show that independent risk factors for PTLD after LT in adults were no Epstein-Barr virus load monitoring strategy, primary sclerosing cholangitis as an indication for LT, era (historic era linked to more intense long-term immunosuppression), and Epstein-Barr virus-seronegative recipient. No other independent risk factors were identified in this study. Of the 207 patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis as an indication for LT, 13 (6.3%) developed PTLD versus 16 out of 1074 (1.5%) patients with other underlying liver diseases (log-rank p <0.001). The yearly PTLD incidence was higher in the first year than in the later years after LT (2.4%/y vs. 0.6%/y) for primary sclerosing cholangitis, but not for other indications (0.16%/y). In Epstein-Barr virus-seronegative recipients PTLD occurred earlier after LT, while in 97% of seropositive recipients it could occur very late after LT.

Novel Benchmark for Adult-to-Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: Integrating Eastern and Western Experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To define benchmark values for adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). BACKGROUND: LDLT utilizes living-donor hemiliver grafts to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist mortality. Although references have been established for donor hepatectomy, no such information exists for recipients to enable conclusive quality and comparative assessments. METHODS: Patients undergoing LDLT were analyzed in 15 high-volume centers (≥10 cases/year) from 3 continents over 5 years (2016-2020), with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Benchmark criteria included a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≤20, no portal vein thrombosis, no previous major abdominal surgery, no renal replacement therapy, no acute liver failure, and no intensive care unit admission. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of all centers' medians. RESULTS: Of 3636 patients, 1864 (51%) qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs, including posttransplant dialysis (≤4%), primary nonfunction (≤0.9%), nonanastomotic strictures (≤0.2%), graft loss (≤7.7%), and redo-liver transplantation (LT) (≤3.6%), at 1-year were below the deceased donor LT benchmarks. Bile leak (≤12.4%), hepatic artery thrombosis (≤5.1%), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI ® ) (≤56) were above the deceased donor LT benchmarks, whereas mortality (≤9.1%) was comparable. The right hemiliver graft, compared with the left, was associated with a lower CCI ® score (34 vs 21, P < 0.001). Preservation of the middle hepatic vein with the right hemiliver graft had no impact neither on the recipient nor on the donor outcome. Asian centers outperformed other centers with CCI ® score (21 vs 47, P < 0.001), graft loss (3.0% vs 6.5%, P = 0.002), and redo-LT rates (1.0% vs 2.5%, P = 0.029). In contrast, non-benchmark low-volume centers displayed inferior outcomes, such as bile leak (15.2%), hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2%), or redo-LT (6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Benchmark LDLT offers a valuable alternative to reduce waitlist mortality. Exchange of expertise, public awareness, and centralization policy are, however, mandatory to achieve benchmark outcomes worldwide.

Novel Benchmark Values for Open Major Anatomic Liver Resection in Non-cirrhotic Patients: A Multicentric Study of 44 International Expert Centers.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities. BACKGROUND: Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures. METHODS: A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016-2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient. RESULTS: Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months. CONCLUSION: These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens.

An international multicentre evaluation of treatment strategies for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma✰.

Background & Aims: Management of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is not well-defined. Therefore, we evaluated the management of cHCC-CCA using an online hospital-wide multicentre survey sent to expert centres. Methods: A survey was sent to members of the European Network for the Study of Cholangiocarcinoma (ENS-CCA) and the International Cholangiocarcinoma Research Network (ICRN), in July 2021. To capture the respondents' contemporary decision-making process, a hypothetical case study with different tumour size and number combinations was embedded. Results: Of 155 surveys obtained, 87 (56%) were completed in full and included for analysis. Respondents represented Europe (68%), North America (20%), Asia (11%), and South America (1%) and included surgeons (46%), oncologists (29%), and hepatologists/gastroenterologists (25%). Two-thirds of the respondents included at least one new patient with cHCC-CCA per year. Liver resection was reported as the most likely treatment for a single cHCC-CCA lesion of 2.0-6.0 cm (range: 73-93%) and for two lesions, one up to 6 cm and a second well-defined lesion of 2.0 cm (range: 60-66%). Nonetheless, marked interdisciplinary differences were noted. Surgeons mainly adhered to resection if technically feasible, whereas up to half of the hepatologists/gastroenterologists and oncologists switched to alternative treatment options with increasing tumour burden. Fifty-one (59%) clinicians considered liver transplantation as an option for patients with cHCC-CCA, with the Milan criteria defining the upper limit of inclusion. Overall, well-defined cHCC-CCA treatment policies were lacking and management was most often dependent on local expertise. Conclusions: Liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Marked interdisciplinary differences were reported, depending on local expertise. These findings stress the need for a well-defined multicentre prospective trial comparing treatments, including liver transplantation, to optimise the therapeutic management of cHCC-CCA. Impact and implications: Because the treatment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA), a rare form of liver cancer, is currently not well-defined, we evaluated the contemporary treatment of this rare tumour type through an online survey sent to expert centres around the world. Based on the responses from 87 clinicians (46% surgeons, 29% oncologists, 25% hepatologists/gastroenterologists), representing four continents and 25 different countries, we found that liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Nonetheless, marked differences in treatment decisions were reported among the different specialties (surgeon vs. oncologist vs. hepatologist/gastroenterologist), highlighting the urgent need for a standardisation of therapeutic strategies for patients with cHCC-CCA.

Combined liver-kidney transplantation with delayed kidney implantation: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: In rare cases, patients require a combined liver-kidney transplant. However, the peri- and postoperative care of liver transplant recipients differs from kidney transplant recipients, which can lead to conflicts of interest. In the case of poor coagulation status and/or instable hemodynamics of the patient, liver transplantation, followed by delayed kidney transplantation can lead to better postoperative recovery. PRESENTATION OF CASE: In our case report, we present a 48-year old man with Alagille syndrome and IgA nephropathy with bilirubin-associated acute kidney injury, causing him to develop both end-stage liver and kidney disease. He underwent a combined liver-kidney transplant as the first patient in the Netherlands, in which the donor kidney was transplanted one day after the liver transplantation. One-year post-transplant patient is in good clinical condition, with normal liver function and an eGFR of 57 ml/min. CONCLUSION: Combined liver-kidney transplantation with delayed kidney implantation in a medical center with no previous experience with this technique is feasible and safe. This could be better for both the patient and the kidney graft.

Role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in liver transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: multicentre, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Mayo protocol for liver transplantation in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is based on strict selection and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in this scenario remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using strict selection criteria, either with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: This was an international, multicentre, retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent transplantation between 2011 and 2020 for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using the Mayo selection criteria and receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Endpoints were post-transplant survival, post-transplant morbidity rate, and time to recurrence. RESULTS: Of 49 patients who underwent liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, 27 received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 22 did not. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplantation survival rates were 65 per cent, 51 per cent and 41 per cent respectively in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 91 per cent, 68 per cent and 53 per cent respectively in the group not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (1-year hazards ratio (HR) 4.55 (95 per cent c.i. 0.98 to 21.13), P = 0.053; 3-year HR 2.07 (95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 5.54), P = 0.146; 5-year HR 1.71 (95 per cent c.i. 0.71 to 4.09), P = 0.229). Hepatic vascular complications were more frequent in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with the group not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nine of 27 versus two of 22, P = 0.045). In multivariable analysis, tumour recurrence occurred less frequently in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (HR 0.30 (95 per cent c.i. 0.09 to 0.97), P = 0.044). CONCLUSION: In selected patients undergoing liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy resulted in a lower risk of tumour recurrence, but was associated with a higher rate of early hepatic vascular complications. Adjustments in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy reducing the risk of hepatic vascular complications, such as omitting radiotherapy, may further improve the outcome in patients undergoing liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Economic Impact of European Liver and Intestine Transplantation Association (ELITA) Recommendations for Hepatitis B Prophylaxis After Liver Transplantation.

The European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association, ELITA, promoted a Consensus Conference involving 20 experts across the world which generated updated guidelines on HBV prophylaxis in liver transplant candidates and recipients. This study explores the economic impact associated with the implementation of the new ELITA guidelines. To this aim, a condition-specific cohort simulation model has been developed to compare new and historical prophylaxis, including only pharmaceutical cost and using the European perspective. The target population simulated in the model included both prevalent and incident cases, and consisted of 6,133 patients after the first year, that increased to 7,442 and 8,743 patents after 5 and 10 years from its implementation. The ELITA protocols allowed a cost saving of around € 235.65 million after 5 years and € 540.73 million after 10 years; which was mainly due to early HIBG withdrawal either after the first 4 weeks or after the first year post Liver Transplantation (LT) depending on the virological risk at transplantation. Results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses. The money saved by the implementation of the ELITA guidelines would allow healthcare decision makers and budget holders to understand where costs could be reduced and resources re-allocated to different needs.

Endoscopic ultrasound in patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: impact on clinical decision-making.

Background and study aims Accurate assessment of the lymph node (LN) status is crucial in resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) to prevent major surgery in patients with extraregional metastatic LNs (MLNs). This study investigates the added value of preoperative endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with or without tissue acquisition (TA) for the detection of MLNs in patients with resectable pCCA. Patients and methods In this retrospective, multicenter cohort study, patients with potentially resectable pCCA who underwent EUS preoperatively between 2010-2020, were included. The clinical impact of EUS-TA was defined as the percentage of patients who did not undergo surgical resection due to MLNs found with EUS-TA. Findings of cross-sectional imaging were compared with EUS-TA findings and surgery. Results EUS was performed on 141 patients, of whom 107 (76 %) had suspicious LNs on cross-sectional imaging. Surgical exploration was prevented in 20 patients (14 %) because EUS-TA detected MLNs, of which 17 (85 %) were extraregional. Finally, 74 patients (52 %) underwent surgical exploration followed by complete resection in 40 (28 %). MLNs were identified at definitive pathology in 24 (33 %) patients, of which 9 (38 %) were extraregional and 15 (63 %) regional. Conclusions EUS-TA may be of value in patients with potentially resectable pCCA based on preoperative cross-sectional imaging, regardless of lymphadenopathy at cross-sectional imaging. A prospective study in which a comprehensive EUS investigation with LN assessment and EUS-TA of LNs is performed routinely should confirm this promise.

Three-year results of renal function in liver transplant recipients on low-dose sirolimus and tacrolimus: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the combination of low-dose sirolimus (SRL) and low-dose extended-release tacrolimus (TAC) compared to normal-dose extended-release TAC results in a difference in the renal function and comparable rates of rejection, graft and patient survival at 36 months after transplantation. This study was an open-label, multicenter randomized, controlled trial. Patients were randomized to once-daily normal-dose extended-release TAC (control group) or once-daily combination therapy of SRL and low-dose extended-release TAC (interventional group). The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) defined as grade ≥3 (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) at 36 months after transplantation. In total, 196 patients were included. CKD at 36 months was not different between the control and interventional group (50.8%, 95% CI: 39.7%-59.9%) vs. 43.7%, 95% CI: 32.8%-52.8%). Only at 6 months after transplantation, the eGFR was higher in the interventional group compared to the control group (mean eGFR 73.1±15 vs. 67.6±16 mL/min/1.73 m2, p=0.02) in the intention-to-treat population. No differences in the secondary endpoints and the number of serious adverse events were found between the groups. Once daily low-dose SRL combined with low-dose extended-release TAC does ultimately not provide less CKD grade ≥3 at 36 months compared to normal-dose extended-release TAC.

Impact of waiting time on post-transplant survival for recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A natural experiment randomized by blood group.

Background & Aims: When listing for liver transplantation, one can transplant as soon as possible or introduce a test-of-time to better select patients, as the tumor's biological behavior is observed. Knowing the degree of harm caused by time itself is essential to advise patients and decide on the maximum duration of the test-of-time. Therefore, we investigated the causal effect of waiting time on post-transplant survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: We analyzed the UNOS-OPTN dataset and exploited a natural experiment created by blood groups. Relations between variables and assumptions were described in a causal graph. Selection bias was addressed by inverse probability weighting. Confounding was avoided using instrumental variable analysis, with an additive hazards model in the second stage. The causal effect was evaluated by estimating the difference in 5-year overall survival if all patients waited 2 months instead of 12 months. Upper bounds of the test-of-time were evaluated for probable scenarios by means of simulation. Results: The F-statistic of the first stage was 86.3. The effect of waiting 12 months vs. 2 months corresponded with a drop in overall survival rate of 5.07% (95% CI 0.277-9.69) and 8.33% (95% CI 0.47-15.60) at 5- and 10-years post-transplant, respectively. The median survival dropped by 3.41 years from 16.21 years (95% CI 15.98-16.60) for those waiting 2 months to 12.80 years (95% CI 10.72-15.90) for those waiting 12 months. Conclusions: From a patient's perspective, the choice between ablate-and-wait vs. immediate transplantation is in favor of immediate transplantation. From a policy perspective, the extra waiting time can be used to increase the utility of scarce donor livers. However, the duration of the test-of-time is bounded, and it likely should not exceed 8 months. Impact and implications: When listing patients with liver cancer for transplantation, it is unclear whether a test-of-time or immediate transplantation offer better outcomes at the population level. In this study, we found that increased liver transplant waiting times are detrimental in patients with liver cancer. Furthermore, our simulation showed that a pre-operative observational period can be useful to ensure good donor liver allocation, but that its duration should not exceed 8 months.