Liver transplantation in alcohol-associated liver disease: ensuring equity through new processes.

Worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic, alcohol use is one of the leading causes of preventable death in the US, in large part due to alcohol-associated liver disease. Throughout history, liver transplantation for this population has been controversial, and many policies and regulations have existed to limit access to lifesaving transplant for patients who use alcohol. In recent years, the rates of liver transplantation for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease have increased dramatically; however, disparities persist. For instance, many criteria used in evaluation for transplant listing, such as social support and prior knowledge of the harms of alcohol use, are not evidence based and may selectively disadvantage patients with alcohol use disorder. In addition, few transplant providers have adequate training in the treatment of alcohol use disorder, and few transplant centers offer specialized addiction treatment. Finally, current approaches to liver transplantation would benefit from adopting principles of harm reduction, which have demonstrated efficacy in the realm of addiction medicine for years. As we look toward the future, we must emphasize the use of evidence-based measures in selecting patients for listing, ensure access to high-quality addiction care for all patients pretransplant and posttransplant, and adopt harm reduction beliefs to better address relapse when it inevitably occurs. We believe that only by addressing each of these issues will we be able to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources in liver transplantation for all patients.

What Should I Do?

: The aim of the study was to examine the conflicting duties of a practicing surgeon who is at high risk for morbidity and mortality from Covid-19 infection. Should he opt out of the care of these patients or does his duty to care override other considerations? Older adults and those with serious medical conditions are at much greater risk for severe disease and death from Covid-19 infection. As a practicing frontline surgeon in a high risk group, the hospital offered the author, and other health care providers at high risk, the option to opt out of the care Covid-19 suspected or infected patients before an anticipated surge. What should the surgeon and other health care providers do? This is a question many are asking and having to answer. In this article, the author describes how difficult the situation of having any choice at all was and then how difficult it was to arrive at a decision. The duty to care and its limits, as well as obligations to society, family, co-workers, and to self, are examined. The author considers how he and others can contribute in other ways to patients and providers. The author arrives at a morally permissible and a rational decision to opt out. Health care workers at high risk can contribute in other ways to patients and providers. It still may not feel right.

Excluding patients from transplant due to social support: Results from a national survey of transplant providers.

Social support is used to determine transplant eligibility despite lack of an evidence base and vague regulatory guidance. It is unknown how many patients are disqualified from transplantation due to inadequate support, and whether providers feel confident using these subjective criteria to determine eligibility. Transplant providers (n = 551) from 202 centers estimated that, on average, 9.6% (standard deviation = 9.4) of patients evaluated in the prior year were excluded due to inadequate support. This varied significantly by United Network for Organ Sharing region (7.6%-12.2%), and by center (21.7% among top quartile). Significantly more providers used social support in listing decisions than believed it ought to be used (86.3% vs 67.6%). Nearly 25% believed that using social support in listing determinations was unfair or were unsure; 67.3% felt it disproportionately impacted patients of low socioeconomic status. Overall, 42.4% were only somewhat or not at all confident using social support to determine transplant suitability. Compared to surgical/medical transplant providers, psychosocial providers had 2.13 greater odds of supporting the criteria (P = .03). Furthermore, 69.2% supported revised guidelines for use of social support in listing decisions. Social support criteria should be reconsidered in light of the limited evidence, potential for disparities, practice variation, low provider confidence, and desire for revised guidelines.

Directed solutions to address differences in access to liver transplantation.

The United Network for Organ Sharing recently altered current liver allocation with the goal of decreasing Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) variance at transplant. Concerns over these and further planned revisions to policy include predicted decrease in total transplants, increased flying and logistical complexity, adverse impact on areas with poor quality health care, and minimal effect on high MELD donor service areas. To address these issues, we describe general approaches to equalize critical transplant metrics among regions and determine how they alter MELD variance at transplant and organ supply to underserved communities. We show an allocation system that increases minimum MELD for local allocation or preferentially directs organs into areas of need decreases MELD variance. Both models have minimal adverse effects on flying and total transplants, and do not disproportionately disadvantage already underserved communities. When combined together, these approaches decrease MELD variance by 28%, more than the recently adopted proposal. These models can be adapted for any measure of variance, can be combined with other proposals, and can be configured to automatically adjust to changes in disease incidence as is occurring with hepatitis C and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

How important is social support in determining patients' suitability for transplantation? Results from a National Survey of Transplant Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines require programmes use subjective assessments of social support when determining transplant suitability, despite limited evidence linking it to outcomes. We examined how transplant providers weigh the importance of social support for kidney transplantation compared with other factors, and variation by clinical role and personal beliefs. METHODS: The National survey of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and the Society of Transplant Social Work in 2016. Using a discrete choice approach, respondents compared two hypothetical patient profiles and selected one for transplantation. Conditional logistic regression estimated the relative importance of each factor; results were stratified by clinical role (psychosocial vs medical/surgical providers) and beliefs (outcomes vs equity). RESULTS: Five hundred and eighy-four transplant providers completed the survey. Social support was the second most influential factor among transplant providers. Providers were most likely to choose a candidate who had social support (OR=1.68, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.86), always adhered to a medical regimen (OR=1.64, 95% CI 1.46 to 1.88), and had a 15 years life expectancy with transplant (OR=1.61, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.85). Psychosocial providers were more influenced by adherence and quality of life compared with medical/surgical providers, who were more influenced by candidates' life expectancy with transplant (p<0.05). For providers concerned with avoiding organ waste, social support was the most influential factor, while it was the least influential for clinicians concerned with fairness (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Social support is highly influential in listing decisions and may exacerbate transplant disparities. Providers' beliefs and reliance on social support in determining suitability vary considerably, raising concerns about transparency and justice.

Are geographic differences in transplantation inherently wrong?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Geographic variation in liver transplantation has been the subject of extensive scrutiny, reflecting concerns that location is unfairly determinative for people needing organ transplantation. Drawing upon a number of established ethical approaches, we examine whether geographic differences in access to livers are inherently unethical. RECENT FINDINGS: We posit that the ethical imperative for redistribution largely hinges upon the belief that access to organs systematically disadvantages certain identifiable groups of patients over others. Yet, our data suggest that regions likely to be net-contributors may suffer from less access to transplantation and other health services, fewer social protections and greater burden of liver disease. Drawing upon a number of ethical approaches, including strict egalitarianism, utilitarianism, Maximin, Reciprocity, Sen's Impartial Spectator and a health equity framework, we demonstrate that the current proposal has significant weaknesses, and may not achieve its goals of improving equity and efficiency. SUMMARY: Formulating effective policies and programs to ameliorate health inequalities requires an understanding of the interrelated causes of mortality disparities and specific interventions to mitigate these causes. Although our analysis does not indicate how ethically distribute livers, but it suggests that this be done with consideration for population-based health measures.

Failure of fibrotic liver regeneration in mice is linked to a severe fibrogenic response driven by hepatic progenitor cell activation.

Failure of fibrotic liver to regenerate after resection limits therapeutic options and increases demand for liver transplantation, representing a significant clinical problem. The mechanism underlying regenerative failure in fibrosis is poorly understood. Seventy percent partial hepatectomy (PHx) was performed in C57Bl/6 mice with or without carbon tetrachloride (CCl4)-induced liver fibrosis. Liver function and regeneration was monitored at 1 to 14 days thereafter by assessing liver mass, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), mRNA expression, and histology. Progenitor (oval) cell mitogen tumor necrosis factor-like weak inducer of apoptosis (TWEAK) and TWEAK-neutralizing antibody were used to manipulate progenitor cell proliferation in vivo. In fibrotic liver, hepatocytes failed to replicate efficiently after PHx. Fibrotic livers showed late (day 5) peak of serum ALT (3542 ± 355 IU/L compared to 93 ± 65 IU/L in nonfibrotic livers), which coincided with progenitor cell expansion, increase in profibrogenic gene expression and de novo collagen deposition. In fibrotic mice, inhibition of progenitor activation using TWEAK-neutralizing antibody after PHx resulted in strongly down-regulated profibrogenic mRNA, reduced serum ALT levels and improved regeneration. Failure of hepatocyte-mediated regeneration in fibrotic liver triggers activation of the progenitor (oval) cell compartment and a severe fibrogenic response. Inhibition of progenitor cell proliferation using anti-TWEAK antibody prevents fibrogenic response and augments fibrotic liver regeneration. Targeting the fibrogenic progenitor response represents a promising strategy to improve hepatectomy outcomes in patients with liver fibrosis.

Substance abuse treatment and its association with relapse to alcohol use after liver transplantation.

Many liver transplantation (LT) programs require substance abuse (SA) treatment for candidates with a history of alcohol abuse. However, there are no data indicating that SA treatment prevents post-LT alcohol relapse. We examined 118 adults who underwent LT from May 2002 to February 2011 to explore the relationship between SA treatment and post-LT relapse to any alcohol use. Sixty-one patients (52%) with a history of alcohol abuse or dependence received SA treatment before LT. Relapse to any alcohol use was identified in 40 LT recipients (34%). Patients who received SA treatment before LT did not differ significantly in the rate of post-LT alcohol relapse from patients who did not receive treatment before transplantation(30% versus 39%, P = 0.20). However, patients who received SA treatment both before and after transplantation had significantly lower rates of alcohol relapse (16%) than patients who received no SA treatment (41%) or SA treatment only before LT (45%, P = 0.03). Our findings suggest that LT programs should consider placing more emphasis on the continuation of some type of SA treatment after transplantation. Future research should prospectively examine the optimal timing for SA treatment that will attenuate the risk of alcohol relapse after transplantation.

A simultaneous liver-kidney transplant recipient with IgA nephropathy limited to native kidneys and BK virus nephropathy limited to the transplant kidney.

Immunoglobulin A (IgA) deposition in the native kidneys of patients with liver disease is well described. Secondary IgA nephropathy usually is thought to be benign, but hematuria, proteinuria, and loss of kidney function have been reported in this context. BK virus nephropathy is an important cause of kidney transplant loss; however, BK virus nephropathy is rare in the native kidneys of patients who underwent transplantation of other organs. We report the case of a patient with alcohol-related end-stage liver disease and chronic kidney disease with hematuria who underwent simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation. His kidney function decreased over the course of several weeks posttransplantation. Biopsy of the transplant kidney showed BK virus nephropathy, but no IgA deposits. In contrast, biopsy of the native kidneys showed IgA deposits, but no BK virus nephropathy. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation wherein both the native and transplant kidneys were biopsied posttransplantation and showed exclusively different pathologies. These findings confirm the predilection of BK virus nephropathy for transplant rather than native kidneys.

Renal transplantation in the setting of early steroid withdrawal: a comparison of rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction dosing in two eras.

BACKGROUND: Modern immunosuppression and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) have facilitated the success of early steroid withdrawal (ESW) protocols. Little data exist on optimal rATG dosing in ESW protocols. METHODS: Rejection at 12 months in era 1 (four doses of rATG, 1.25 mg/kg) vs. era 2 (three doses of rATG, 1.25 mg/kg) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included patient and graft survival, renal function and infectious complications. Factors associated with rejection at 1 year were identified. RESULTS: 199 patients received rATG induction and ESW: 102 in era 1 and 97 in era 2. Compared to era 1, era 2 was not associated with worse outcomes, including rejection, renal function, infection or graft survival. Rejection at 1 year and uncensored graft survival differed between the dosing groups. Rejection rates were significantly higher in the <4 mg/kg group compared to the 4-5.9-mg/kg and the ≥6-mg/kg groups, whereas uncensored graft survival was the lowest in the ≥6-mg/kg group. Factors associated with rejection at 12 months included: rATG dose received of 4-5.9 versus <4 mg/kg (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.036-0.85, p = 0.026); recipient age (per year, OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-1.0, p = 0.038); panel reactive antibody 10-79.9 versus <10% (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.2-25, p = 0.030) and rATG dose held (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.0-15, p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of rATG dosing based on era did not result in a significant difference in rejection, renal function, infection or graft survival. However, when evaluating the study population based on actual dose received there were notable differences in both rejection rates and uncensored graft survival.

Recipient's unemployment restricts access to renal transplantation.

Equitable distribution of a scarce resource such as kidneys for transplantation can be a challenging task for transplant centers. In this study, we evaluated the association between recipient's employment status and access to renal transplantation in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We used data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). The primary variable of interest was employment status at ESRD onset. Two outcomes were analyzed in Cox model: (i) being placed on the waiting list for renal transplantation or being transplanted (whichever occurred first); and (ii) first transplant in patients who were placed on the waiting list. We analyzed 429 409 patients (age of ESRD onset 64.2 ± 15.2 yr, 55.0% males, 65.1% White). Compared with patients who were unemployed, patients working full time were more likely to be placed on the waiting list/transplanted (HR 2.24, p < 0.001) and to receive a transplant once on the waiting list (HR 1.65, p < 0.001). Results indicate that recipient's employment status is strongly associated with access to renal transplantation, with unemployed and partially employed patients at a disadvantage. Adding insurance status to the model reduces the effect size, but the association still remains significant, indicating additional contribution from other factors.

The Alcohol Relapse Risk Assessment: a scoring system to predict the risk of relapse to any alcohol use after liver transplant.

CONTEXT: Alcohol relapse after liver transplant heightens concern about recurrent disease, nonadherence to the immunosuppression regimen, and death. OBJECTIVES: To develop a scoring system to stratify risk of alcohol relapse after liver transplant. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All adult liver transplants performed from May 2002 to February 2011 at a single center in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The incidence of return to any alcohol consumption after liver transplant. RESULTS: Thirty-four percent (40/118) of patients with a history of alcohol abuse/dependency relapsed to use of any alcohol after liver transplant. Nine of 25 hypothesized risk factors were predictive of alcohol relapse after liver transplant: absence of hepatocellular carcinoma, tobacco dependence, continued alcohol use after liver disease diagnosis, low motivation for alcohol treatment, poor stress management skills, no rehabilitation relationship, limited social support, lack of nonmedical behavioral consequences, and continued engagement in social activities with alcohol present. Each independent predictor was assigned an Alcohol Relapse Risk Assessment (ARRA) risk value of 1 point, and patients were classified into 1 of 4 groups by ARRA score: ARRA I = 0, ARRA II = 1 to 3, ARRA III = 4 to 6, and ARRA IV = 7 to 9. Patients in the 2 higher ARRA classifications had significantly higher rates of alcohol relapse and were more likely to return to pretransplant levels of drinking. CONCLUSION: Alcohol relapse rates are moderately high after liver transplant. The ARRA is a valid and practical tool for identifying pretransplant patients with alcohol abuse or dependency at elevated risk of any alcohol use after liver transplant.

Patient-reported immunosuppression nonadherence 6 to 24 months after liver transplant: association with pretransplant psychosocial factors and perceptions of health status change.

CONTEXT: Knowing the prevalence and risk factors of immunosuppression nonadherence after liver transplant may help guide intervention development. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether sociodemographic and psychosocial variables before liver transplant are predictive of nonadherence after liver transplant. DESIGN: Structured telephone interviews were used to collect self-report immunosuppression adherence and health status information. Medical record reviews were then completed to retrospectively examine the relationship between immunosuppression adherence and pretransplant variables, including sociodemographic and medical characteristics and the presence or absence of 6 hypothesized psychosocial risk factors. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A nonprobability sample of 236 adults 6 to 24 months after liver transplant at 2 centers completed structured telephone interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Immunosuppressant medication nonadherence, categorized as missed-dose and altered-dose "adherent" or "nonadherent" during the past 6 months; immunosuppression medication holidays. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients (35%) were missed-dose nonadherent and 34 patients (14%) were altered-dose nonadherent. Seventy-one patients (30%) reported 1 or more 24-hour immunosuppression holidays in the past 6 months. Missed-dose nonadherence was predicted by male sex (odds ratio, 2.46; P= .01), longer time since liver transplant (odds ratio, 1.08; P= .01), pretransplant mood disorder (odds ratio, 2.52; P=.004), and pretransplant social support instability (odds ratio, 2.25; P=.03). Altered-dose nonadherence was predicted by pretransplant mood disorder (odds ratio, 2.15; P= .04) and pretransplant social support instability (odds ratio, 1.89; P= .03). CONCLUSION: Rates of immunosuppressant nonadherence and drug holidays in the first 2 years after liver transplant are unacceptably high. Pretransplant mood disorder and social support instability increase the risk of nonadherence, and interventions should target these modifiable risk factors.

Carbon monoxide enhances early liver regeneration in mice after hepatectomy.

Hepatocyte proliferation early after liver resection is critical in restoring liver mass and preserving function as the liver regenerates. Carbon monoxide (CO) generated by heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) strongly influences cellular proliferation and both HO-1 and CO are accepted hepatoprotective molecules. Mice lacking functional HO-1 were unable to mount an appropriate regenerative response following partial hepatectomy (PHTx) compared to wildtype controls. We therefore hypothesized that exogenous administration of CO at low, nontoxic concentrations would modulate hepatocyte (HC) proliferation and liver regeneration. Animals treated with a low concentration of CO 1 hour prior to 70% hepatectomy demonstrated enhanced expression of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) in the liver compared to controls that correlated with a more rapid onset of HC proliferation as measured by phospho-histone3 staining, increased expression of cyclins D1 and E, phosphorylated retinoblastoma, and decreased expression of the mitotic inhibitor p21. PHTx also increased activation of the HGF receptor c-Met, which was detected more then 9 hours earlier in the livers of CO-treated mice. Blockade of c-Met resulted in abrogation of the CO effects on HC proliferation. Corresponding with increased HC proliferation, treatment with CO maintained liver function with normal prothrombin times versus a 2-fold prolongation in controls. In a lethal 85% PHTx, CO-treated mice showed a greater survival rate compared to controls. In vitro, CO increased HGF expression in hepatic stellate cells, but not HC, and when cocultured together led to increased HC proliferation. In summary, we demonstrate that administration of exogenous CO enhances rapid and early HC proliferation and, importantly, preserves function following PHTx. Taken together, CO may offer a viable therapeutic option to facilitate rapid recovery following PHTx.

Social adaptability index predicts kidney transplant outcome: a single-center retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Social adaptability index (SAI) is the composite index of socioeconomic status based upon employment status, education level, marital status, substance abuse and income. It has been used in the past to define populations at higher risk for inferior clinical outcomes. The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the association of the SAI with renal transplant outcome. METHODS: We used data from the clinical database at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Transplant Institute, supplemented with data from United Network for Organ Sharing for the years 2001-09. The association between SAI and graft loss and recipient mortality in renal transplant recipients was studied using Cox model in the entire study population as well as in the subgroups based on age, race, sex and diabetes status. RESULTS: We analyzed 533 end-stage renal disease patients (mean age at transplant 50.8 ± 11.8 years, 52.2% diabetics, 58.9% males, 71.1% White). Higher SAI on a continuous scale was associated with decreased risk of graft loss [hazard ratio (HR) 0.89, P < 0.05, per 1 point increment in the SAI] and decreased risk of recipient mortality (HR 0.84, P < 0.01, per 1 point increment in the SAI). Higher SAI was also significantly associated with decreased risk for graft loss/recipient mortality in some study subgroups (age 41-65 years, males, non-diabetics). CONCLUSIONS: SAI has an association with graft and recipient survival in renal transplant recipients. It can be helpful in identifying patients at higher risk for inferior transplant outcome as a target population for potential intervention.

Clinical pathways in transplantation: a review and examples from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Clinical pathways (CP) have been developed to aid in the management of many surgical and medical conditions. Studies show the benefits of CP on outcomes including reduction in length of stay (LOS), morbidity, costs, and improvement in patient satisfaction (Arch Surg 2008: 394: 31; J Eval Clin Pract 2007: 13: 920; Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000: 126: 322; Circulation 2000: 101: 461; BMC Pulm Med 2006: 6: 22; Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2006: 19: 237; Am J Med Qual 2005: 20: 83; Am J Surg 2006: 192: 399; Am Surg 2005: 71: 152). Reports of CP in solid organ transplantation are lacking, possibly given the complexity of the transplant procedures that entail a complex, multidisciplinary pre-operative evaluation, inpatient, and post-operative time frames. We have developed CP from presentation for transplant evaluation to post-transplant follow-up for liver, kidney, and pancreas transplantation and live kidney and live liver donation and are making them available online for viewing. Our CPs encompass the pre-operative, peri-operative, and post-operative period, including both outpatient and inpatient care. We propose that transplantation is an ideal forum for successful implementation of CP, given the rigorous process that centers are subject to for CMS approval and the ample opportunity for improving our patients' lives by improvement in and streamlining of the entire process of clinical care from end-stage organ failure to post-transplant long-term management. Our CPs can be found at http://bidmc.org/CentersandDepartments/Departments/TransplantInstitute/TransplantClinicalPathways.aspx.

Liver transplant center risk tolerance.

Recent changes in Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) condition for participation, using benchmark volume/outcomes requirements for certification, have been implemented. Consequently, the ability of a transplant center to assess its risk tolerance is important in successful management. An analysis of SRTR data was performed to determine donor/recipient risk factors for graft loss or patient death in the first year. Each transplant performed was then assigned a prospective relative risk (RR) of failure. Using a Monte-Carlo simulation, transplants were selected at random that met the centers' acceptable risk tolerance. Transplant center volume was fixed and its risk tolerance was adjusted to determine the impact on outcomes. The model was run 1000 times on centers with varying volume. The modeling demonstrates that centers with smaller annual volumes must use a more risk taking strategy than larger volume centers to avoid being flagged for CMS volume requirements. The modeling also demonstrates optimal risk taking strategies for centers based upon volume to minimize the probability of being flagged for not meeting volume or outcomes benchmarks. Small volume centers must perform higher risk transplants to meet current CMS requirements and are at risk for adverse action secondary to chance alone.