Digital imaging software versus the "eyeball" method in quantifying steatosis in a liver biopsy.

Steatotic livers represent a potentially underutilized resource to increase the donor graft pool; however, 1 barrier to the increased utilization of such grafts is the heterogeneity in the definition and the measurement of macrovesicular steatosis (MaS). Digital imaging software (DIS) may better standardize definitions to study posttransplant outcomes. Using HALO, a DIS, we analyzed 63 liver biopsies, from 3 transplant centers, transplanted between 2016 and 2018, and compared macrovesicular steatosis percentage (%MaS) as estimated by transplant center, donor hospital, and DIS. We also quantified the relationship between DIS characteristics and posttransplant outcomes using log-linear regression for peak aspartate aminotransferase, peak alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin on postoperative day 7, as well as logistic regression for early allograft dysfunction. Transplant centers and donor hospitals overestimated %MaS compared with DIS, with better agreement at lower %MaS and less agreement for higher %MaS. No DIS analyzed liver biopsies were calculated to be >20% %MaS; however, 40% of liver biopsies read by transplant center pathologists were read to be >30%. Percent MaS read by HALO was positively associated with peak aspartate aminotransferase (regression coefficient= 1.04 1.08 1.12 , p <0.001), peak alanine aminotransferase (regression coefficient = 1.04 1.08 1.12 , p <0.001), and early allograft dysfunction (OR= 1.10 1.40 1.78 , p =0.006). There was no association between HALO %MaS and total bilirubin on postoperative day 7 (regression coefficient = 0.99 1.01 1.04 , p =0.3). DIS provides reproducible quantification of steatosis that could standardize MaS definitions and identify phenotypes associated with good clinical outcomes to increase the utilization of steatite livers.

Successful liver transplantation from deceased donors with active COVID-19 infections with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 in donor liver and aorta.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has had unprecedented effects on society and modern healthcare. In liver transplantation, uncertainty regarding the safety of performing transplants during the early stage of the pandemic resulted in increased waitlist mortality. Additionally, concerns about disease transmission led to avoidance of deceased donors with COVID-19 infections. Several successful case reports describing incidental transplant of organs from donors with COVID-19 infections or intentional transplant of such donors into recipients with current or prior COVID-19 infections prompted the transplant community to re-evaluate that position. While excellent short-term results have been published, little is known about use of donors with active infections and the extent of COVID-19 organ involvement, which may affect long term outcomes. METHODS: We report the successful transplantation of three livers from deceased donors with active COVID-19 infections. Donor liver and aortic tissues were evaluated by sensitive molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 RNA via in situ hybridization and real-time quantitative reverse transcription PCR. RESULTS: Postoperatively, all patients had excellent allograft function, without clinical or molecular evidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in donor tissues. CONCLUSION: This evidence supports the use of liver donors with active COVID-19 infections.

Offer Acceptance Patterns for Liver Donors Aged 70 and Older.

Despite a documented survival benefit, older liver donor (OLD, age ≥70) graft offers are frequently declined, with utilization worsening over the last decade. To understand how offer acceptance varies by center, we studied 1113 eventually transplanted OLD grafts from 2009 to 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data and random-intercept multilevel logistic regression. To understand how center-level acceptance of OLD graft offers might be associated with waitlist and posttransplant outcomes, we studied all adult, actively listed, liver-only candidates and recipients during the study period using Poisson regression (transplant rate), competing risks regression (waitlist mortality), and Cox regression (posttransplant mortality). Among 117 centers, OLD offer acceptance ranged from 0 (23 centers) to 95 acceptances, with a median odds ratio of 2.88. Thus, a candidate may be three times as likely to receive an OLD graft simply by listing at a different center. Centers in the highest quartile (Q4) of OLD acceptance (accepted 39% of OLD offers) accepted more nationally shared organs (Q4 versus Q1: 14.1% versus 0.0%, P < 0.001) and had higher annual liver transplant volume (Q4 versus Q1: 80 versus 21, P < 0.001). After adjustment, nationally shared OLD offers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.20) and offers to centers with higher median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at transplant (aOR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.87) were less likely to be accepted. OLD offers to centers with higher annual transplant volume were more likely to be accepted (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.14-1.30). Additionally, candidates listed at centers within the highest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance had higher deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) rates (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.41-1.50), lower waitlist mortality (adjusted subhazard ratio: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.72-0.76), and similar posttransplant survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.86-1.01) when compared with those listed at centers in the lowest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance. The wide variation in OLD offer acceptance supports the need for optimizing the organ offer process and efficiently directing OLD offers to centers more likely to use them.

Noninvasive Risk Stratification for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Among Living Liver Donor Candidates: A Proposed Algorithm.

To reduce waitlist mortality, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has increased over the past decade in the United States, but not at a rate sufficient to completely mitigate organ shortage. As a result, there are ongoing efforts to expand the living liver donor pool. Simultaneously, the prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in the general population has increased, which has significant implications on the pool of potential living liver donors. As such, a clinical assessment algorithm that exhaustively evaluates for NAFLD and fibrosis is critical to the safe expansion of LDLT. An ideal algorithm would employ safe and noninvasive methods, relying on liver biopsy only when necessary. While exclusion of NAFLD and fibrosis by noninvasive means is widely studied within the general population, there are no well-accepted guidelines for evaluation of living donors using these modalities. Here we review the current literature regarding noninvasive NALFD and fibrosis evaluation and propose a potential algorithm to apply these modalities for the selection of living liver donors.

Temporal trends in utilization and outcomes of steatotic donor livers in the United States.

Steatotic donor livers (SDLs) (macrosteatosis ≥30%) represent a possible donor pool expansion, but are frequently discarded due to a historical association with mortality and graft loss. However, changes in recipient/donor demographics, allocation policy, and clinical protocols might have altered utilization and outcomes of SDLs. We used Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2005 to 2017 and adjusted multilevel regression to quantify temporal trends in discard rates (logistic) and posttransplant outcomes (Cox) of SDLs, accounting for Organ Procurement Organization-level variation. Of 4346 recovered SDLs, 58.0% were discarded in 2005, versus only 43.1% in 2017 (P < .001). SDLs were always substantially more likely discarded versus non-SDLs, although this difference decreased over time (adjusted odds ratio in 2005-2007:13.15 15.2817.74 ; 2008-2011:11.77 13.4115.29 ; 2012-2014:9.87 11.3713.10 ; 2015-2017:7.79 8.8910.15 , P < .001 for all). Conversely, posttransplant outcomes of recipients of SDLs improved over time: recipients of SDLs from 2012 to 2017 had 46% lower risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.43 0.540.68 , P < .001) and 47% lower risk of graft loss (aHR: 0.42 0.530.67 , P < .001) compared to 2005 to 2011. In fact, in 2012 to 2017, recipients of SDLs had equivalent mortality (aHR: 0.90 1.041.21 , P = .6) and graft loss (aHR: 0.90 1.041.20 , P = .6) to recipients of non-SDLs. Increasing utilization of SDLs might be a reasonable strategy to expand the donor pool.

Validation of predictive models identifying patients at risk for massive transfusion during liver transplantation and their potential impact on blood bank resource utilization.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative massive transfusion (MT) is common during liver transplantation (LT). A predictive model of MT has the potential to improve use of blood bank resources. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Development and validation cohorts were identified among deceased-donor LT recipients from 2010 to 2016. A multivariable model of MT generated from the development cohort was validated with the validation cohort and refined using both cohorts. The combined cohort also validated the previously reported McCluskey risk index (McRI). A simple modified risk index (ModRI) was then created from the combined cohort. Finally, a method to translate model predictions to a population-specific blood allocation strategy was described and demonstrated for the study population. RESULTS: Of the 403 patients, 60 (29.6%) in the development and 51 (25.5%) in the validation cohort met the definition for MT. The ModRI, derived from variables incorporated into multivariable model, ranged from 0 to 5, where 1 point each was assigned for hemoglobin level of less than 10 g/dL, platelet count of less than 100 × 109 /dL, thromboelastography R interval of more than 6 minutes, simultaneous liver and kidney transplant and retransplantation, and a ModRI of more than 2 defined recipients at risk for MT. The multivariable model, McRI, and ModRI demonstrated good discrimination (c statistic [95% CI], 0.77 [0.70-0.84]; 0.69 [0.62-0.76]; and 0.72 [0.65-0.79], respectively, after correction for optimism). For blood allocation of 6 or 15 units of red blood cells (RBCs) based on risk of MT, the ModRI would prevent unnecessary crossmatching of 300 units of RBCs/100 transplants. CONCLUSIONS: Risk indices of MT in LT can be effective for risk stratification and reducing unnecessary blood bank resource utilization.

What's the score? A comparison of deceased donor kidney scoring systems and correlation with graft outcome.

BACKGROUND: A number of deceased donor kidney scoring systems have been developed to predict post-transplant graft failure. However, studies comparing the predictive ability of these scoring systems to each other are lacking. METHODS: We used single-center histopathologic and UNOS data from 140 marginal deceased donor kidneys and transplant recipients to compare the predictive accuracy of the Maryland Aggregate Pathology Index (MAPI), Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI), Remuzzi, and Nyberg scoring systems for 2-year graft survival using time-dependent receiver operating curves and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: MAPI had the highest predictive accuracy (area under curve [AUC] = 0.81) compared to KDRI (AUC = 0.45), Remuzzi (AUC = 0.59), and Nyberg (AUC = 0.63) for 2-year graft survival. Furthermore, when analyzing each score according to its pre-defined risk strata, MAPI was the only scoring system for which 2-year graft survival was significantly different across strata (84.3% for low risk, 56.5% for intermediate risk, and 50% for high risk, P < .001). Additionally, MAPI was the only risk score significantly associated with 2-year graft survival (hazard ratio per point: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.23, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a single-center cohort of biopsied marginal kidneys used for transplantation, MAPI had the best predictive ability of these four scoring systems. When biopsy data are available for kidneys considered for transplantation, the MAPI score may provide additional information that could be used to better identify kidneys likely to have longer graft survival.

Steroid-sparing maintenance immunosuppression is safe and effective after simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation.

Optimization of maintenance immunosuppression (mIS) regimens in the transplant recipient requires a balance between sufficient potency to prevent rejection and avoidance of excessive immunosuppression to prevent toxicities and complications. The optimal regimen after simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplantation remains unclear, but small single-center reports have shown success with steroid-sparing regimens. We studied 4184 adult SLK recipients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, from March 1, 2002, to February 28, 2017, on tacrolimus-based regimens at 1 year post-transplant. We determined the association between mIS regimen and mortality and graft failure using Cox proportional hazard models. The use of steroid-sparing regimens increased post-transplant, from 16.1% at discharge to 88.0% at 5 years. Using multi-level logistic regression modeling, we found center-level variation to be the major contributor to choice of mIS regimen (ICC 44.5%; 95% CI: 36.2%-53.0%). In multivariate analysis, use of a steroid-sparing regimen at 1 year was associated with a 21% decreased risk of mortality compared to steroid-containing regimens (aHR 0.79, P = .01) and 20% decreased risk of liver graft failure (aHR 0.80, P = .01), without differences in kidney graft loss risk (aHR 0.92, P = .6). Among SLK recipients, the use of a steroid-sparing regimen appears to be safe and effective without adverse effects on patient or graft survival.

Survival benefit of accepting livers from deceased donors over 70 years old.

Livers from older donors (OLDs; age ≥70) are risky and often declined; however, it is likely that some candidates will benefit from OLDs versus waiting for younger ones. To characterize the survival benefit of accepting OLD grafts, we used 2009-2017 SRTR data to identify 24 431 adult liver transplant (LT) candidates who were offered OLD grafts eventually accepted by someone. Outcomes from the time-of-offer were compared between candidates who accepted an OLD graft and matched controls within MELD ± 2 who declined the same offer. Candidates who accepted OLD grafts (n = 1311) were older (60.5 vs. 57.8 years, P < .001), had a higher median MELD score (25 vs. 22, P < .001), and were less likely to have hepatitis C cirrhosis (14.9% vs. 31.2%, P < .001). Five-year cumulative mortality among those who accepted versus declined the same OLD offer was 23.4% versus 41.2% (P < .001). Candidates who accepted OLDs experienced an almost twofold reduction in mortality (aHR:0.45 0.520.59 , P < .001) compared to those who declined the same offer, especially among the highest MELD (35-40) candidates (aHR:0.10 0.240.55 , P = .001). Accepting an OLD offer provided substantial long-term survival benefit compared to waiting for a better organ offer, notably among candidates with MELD 35-40. Providers should consider these benefits as they evaluate OLD graft offers.

Liver transplantation and waitlist mortality for HCC and non-HCC candidates following the 2015 HCC exception policy change.

Historically, exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) led to higher transplant rates and lower waitlist mortality for HCC candidates compared to non-HCC candidates. As of October 2015, HCC candidates must wait 6 months after initial application to obtain exception points; the impact of this policy remains unstudied. Using 2013-2017 SRTR data, we identified 39  350 adult, first-time, active waitlist candidates and compared deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) rates and waitlist mortality/dropout for HCC versus non-HCC candidates before (October 8, 2013-October 7, 2015, prepolicy) and after (October 8, 2015-October 7, 2017, postpolicy) the policy change using Cox and competing risks regression, respectively. Compared to non-HCC candidates with the same calculated MELD, HCC candidates had a 3.6-fold higher rate of DDLT prepolicy (aHR = 3.49 3.69 3.89 ) and a 2.2-fold higher rate of DDLT postpolicy (aHR = 2.09 2.21 2.34 ). Compared to non-HCC candidates with the same allocation priority, HCC candidates had a 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality/dropout prepolicy (asHR = 0.54 0.63 0.73 ) and a comparable risk of mortality/dropout postpolicy (asHR = 0.81 0.95 1.11 ). Following the policy change, the DDLT advantage for HCC candidates remained, albeit dramatically attenuated, without any substantial increase in waitlist mortality/dropout. In the context of sickest-first liver allocation, the revised policy seems to have established allocation equity for HCC and non-HCC candidates.

Alemtuzumab induction and belatacept maintenance in marginal pathology renal allografts.

We performed a prospective, 12-month, single-center, nonrandomized, open-label pilot study to investigate the use of belatacept therapy combined with alemtuzumab induction in renal allografts with preexisting pathology, as these kidneys may be more susceptible to additional toxicity when exposed to calcineurin inhibitors posttransplant. Nineteen belatacept recipients were matched retrospectively to a cohort of tacrolimus recipients on the basis of preimplantation pathology. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was not significantly different between belatacept and tacrolimus recipients at either 3 or 12 months posttransplant (59 vs 45, P = 0.1 and 56 vs 48 mL/min/1.72/m2 , P = 0.3). Biopsy-proven acute rejection rates at 12 months were 26% in belatacept recipients and 16% in tacrolimus recipients (P = 0.7). Graft survival at 1 year was 89% in both groups. Alemtuzumab induction combined with either calcineurin inhibitor or costimulatory blockade therapies resulted in similar acceptable one-year outcomes in kidneys with preexisting pathologic changes. Longer-term follow-up may be necessary to identify preferential strategies to improve outcomes of kidneys at a higher risk for poor function (ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT01496417).

Hepatitis C-positive donor liver transplantation for hepatitis C seronegative recipients.

BACKGROUND: The opioid crisis has led to an increase in hepatitis C virus-positive donors in the past decade. Whereas historically hepatitis C seropositive organs were routinely discarded, the advent of direct-acting antiviral agents has notably expanded the utilization of organs from donors with hepatitis C. There has been growing experience with liver transplantation (LT) from hepatitis C seropositive donors to hepatitis C seropositive recipients. However, data remain limited on LT from hepatitis C seropositive or hepatitis C ribonucleic acid positive donors to hepatitis C seronegative recipients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 26 hepatitis C seronegative recipients who received hepatitis C seropositive donor livers followed by preemptive antiviral therapy with direct-acting antiviral treatment at the Johns Hopkins Hospital Comprehensive Transplant Center from January 1, 2017, to August 31, 2019. RESULTS: Twenty-five of the 26 recipients are alive with proper graft function; 20 of them received livers from hepatitis C nucleic acid testing positive donors. All 12 recipients who completed their direct-acting antiviral courses and have reached sufficient follow-up for sustained virologic response have achieved sustained virologic response. Nine of our recipients have either completed direct-acting antiviral treatment without sufficient follow-up time for sustained virologic response or are undergoing direct-acting antiviral treatment. One patient is awaiting antiviral treatment initiation pending insurance approval. Of note, 11 of 12 patients with sustained virologic response received a hepatitis C nucleic acid testing positive donor liver. CONCLUSION: Hepatitis C seronegative patients who receive a hepatitis C seropositive or hepatitis C nucleic acid testing positive liver allograft can enjoy good short-term outcomes with hepatitis C cure following direct-acting antiviral treatment.

The Role of Liver Transplantation in Alcoholic Hepatitis.

Acute alcoholic hepatitis is a syndrome of jaundice and hepatic decompensation that occurs with excessive alcohol consumption. The diagnosis can be made with a combination of clinical characteristics and laboratory studies, though biopsy may be required in unclear cases. Acute alcoholic hepatitis can range from mild to severe disease, as determined by a Maddrey discriminant function ≥32. Mild forms can be managed with supportive care and abstinence from alcohol. While mild form has an overall good prognosis, severe alcoholic hepatitis is associated with an extremely high short-term mortality of up to 50%. Additional complications of severe alcoholic hepatitis can include hepatic encephalopathy, gastrointestinal bleeding, renal failure, and infection; these patients frequently require intensive care unit admission. Corticosteroids may have short-term benefit in this group of patients if there are no contraindications; however, a subset of patients do not respond to steroids. New emerging therapies, which target hepatic regeneration, bile acid metabolism, and extracorporeal liver support, are being investigated. Liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease was traditionally only considered in patients who have achieved 6 months of abstinence, in part due to social and ethical concerns regarding the use of a limited resource. However, the majority of patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis who fail medical therapy will not live long enough to meet this requirement. Recent studies have demonstrated that early liver transplantation in carefully selected patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis who fail medical therapy can provide a significant survival benefit and yields survival outcomes comparable to liver transplantation for other indications, with 6-month survival rates ranging from 77% to 100%. Alcohol relapse posttransplantation remains an important challenge, and heavy consumption can contribute to graft loss and mortality. Future investigation should address the substantial post-liver transplantation recidivism rate, from improving selection criteria to increasing posttransplantation substance abuse treatment resources.

Clinicopathological Distinction of Low-AFP-Secreting vs. High-AFP-Secreting Hepatocellular Carcinomas.

Ilntroduction and aims. We aimed to investigate the clinical and pathological differences between low-AFP-secreting (AFP < 20 ng/mL) and high-AFP-secreting (AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL) hepatocellular carcinomas in patients who undergo liver transplant (LT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We evaluated 145 patients who underwent deceased donor LT for HCC from January 1, 2005 until August 1, 2015 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. RESULTS: Median pre-LT AFP in the entire cohort was 13 ng/mL (IQR 6-59). Using serum AFP cutoff of 20 ng/mL, 61 (42%) patients had high-AFP-secreting tumors and 84 (58%) had low-AFP-secreting tumors. Patients with high-AFP-secreting tumors had larger lesions (3 cm vs. 2.4 cm, p = 0.024), and were more likely to have microvascular-invasion (36.1% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.02) and poor-differentiation (18% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.01), and tumor recurrence following LT (28% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year recurrence-free survival for patients in the low-AFP-secreting group compared to the high-AFP-secreting group were 100%, 92%, 92% vs. 81.3%, 71.3%, 68.5% respectively (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: AFP is a suboptimal predictor of tumor recurrence following liver transplant in HCC patients. However, it can have some value in distinguishing more aggressive forms of HCC (high-AFP-secreting) that are associated with higher tumor recurrence. Novel tumor biomarkers are needed that can enhance predicting tumor recurrence following LT based on tumor biology.

Three-year Results of a Pilot Program in Early Liver Transplantation for Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine our pilot to transplant selected patients with acute alcoholic hepatitis, initiated in October 2012. BACKGROUND: Six months of alcohol abstinence is typically required before liver transplant. A Franco-Belgian protocol showed that early transplant in severe alcoholic hepatitis could improve survival with low incidence of alcohol relapse. Application of this controversial indication is growing despite unclear generalizability. METHODS: Data was collected on all patients with alcohol-related liver disease since initiation of the pilot through June 2015. Patients were stratified into two groups: severe alcoholic hepatitis as first liver decompensation (Group 1), alcoholic cirrhosis with ≥6 months abstinence (Group 2). Alcohol relapse was defined as any evidence of alcohol consumption after transplant, which was assessed for harmful patterns of binge or frequent drinking. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent liver transplant, including 17 patients in Group 1. Six-month survival was 100% versus 89% for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.27). Alcohol relapse was similar in Group 1 versus Group 2: 23.5% versus 29.2% (P > 0.99). Harmful drinking was higher in Group 1 versus Group 2, despite lack of statistical significance: 23.5% versus 11.5% (P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot with carefully selected patients, early liver transplant provided excellent short-term survival, and similar rates of alcohol relapse compared with patients with 6 months of abstinence. Harmful patterns of relapse remain challenging in this population, highlighting the need for validated models to predict alcohol relapse, and need for extreme caution in selecting patients for this exceptional indication. Larger prospective studies and longer follow up are necessary.

A rare, potentially life-threatening presentation of passenger lymphocyte syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Passenger lymphocyte syndrome occurs when donor lymphocytes are transplanted with a solid organ and produce alloantibodies that react with antigens on the recipient's red blood cells (RBCs). Typically, passenger lymphocyte syndrome presents as immunoglobulin G antibody-mediated, extravascular hemolytic anemia with reticulocytosis. Often, the donor was alloimmunized before transplantation. CASE REPORT: A 34-year-old Group O, D+ man with a negative antibody screen received a liver transplant from a Group O, D- donor. Twenty Group O, D+ RBC units were transfused on Postoperative Days (PODs) 0 through 2. On POD 7, the patient developed anemia, a weakly positive antibody screen, and a positive direct antiglobulin test with anti-D in the eluate. After POD 8, a D- transfusion protocol was initiated. Despite laboratory evidence of hemolysis, two initial peripheral blood smears showed no increase in schistocytes or spherocytes, the reticulocyte count was depressed, and a marrow biopsy revealed erythroid hyperplasia. Eventually, anemia resolved after a period of medication non-compliance; however, a positive direct antiglobulin test persisted to the last follow-up date (POD 233). RESULTS: Other potential causes of aplastic anemia were investigated, but no alternative cause was found. History excluded passive anti-D. D+, LW- cells were reactive, excluding anti-LW. Genotyping showed no evidence of a partial D genotype. Chart review revealed that the liver donor had a history of anti-D. A diagnosis of passenger lymphocyte syndrome was reached. CONCLUSION: Although antibody-mediated hemolytic anemia has been reported to cause reticulocytopenia in the presence of marrow erythroid hyperplasia, this report of passenger lymphocyte syndrome causing a similar post-transplant anemia in association with reticulocytopenia is noteworthy.

Predictive Modeling of Massive Transfusion Requirements During Liver Transplantation and Its Potential to Reduce Utilization of Blood Bank Resources.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing liver transplantation frequently but inconsistently require massive blood transfusion. The ability to predict massive transfusion (MT) could reduce the impact on blood bank resources through customization of the blood order schedule. Current predictive models of MT for blood product utilization during liver transplantation are not generally applicable to individual institutions owing to variability in patient population, intraoperative management, and definitions of MT. Moreover, existing models may be limited by not incorporating cirrhosis stage or thromboelastography (TEG) parameters. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent deceased-donor liver transplantation at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2010 and 2014. We defined MT as intraoperative transfusion of > 10 units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) and developed a multivariable predictive model of MT that incorporated cirrhosis stage and TEG parameters. The accuracy of the model was assessed with the goodness-of-fit test, receiver operating characteristic analysis, and bootstrap resampling. The distribution of correct patient classification was then determined as we varied the model threshold for classifying MT. Finally, the potential impact of these predictions on blood bank resources was examined. RESULTS: Two hundred three patients were included in the study. Sixty (29.6%) patients met the definition for MT and received a median (interquartile range) of 19.0 (14.0-27.0) pRBC units intraoperatively compared with 4.0 units (1.0-6.0) for those who did not satisfy the criterion for MT. The multivariable model for predicting MT included Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, whether simultaneous liver and kidney transplant was performed, cirrhosis stage, hemoglobin concentration, platelet concentration, and TEG R interval and angle. This model demonstrated good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test P = .45) and good discrimination (c statistic: 0.835; 95% confidence interval, 0.781-0.888). A probability cutoff threshold of 0.25 was found to misclassify only 4 of 100 patients as unlikely to experience MT, with the majority such misclassifications within 4 units of the working definition for MT. For this threshold, a preoperative blood ordering schedule that allocated 6 units of pRBCs for those unlikely to experience MT and 15 for those who were likely to experience MT would prevent unnecessary crossmatching of 338 units/100 transplants. CONCLUSIONS: When clinical and laboratory parameters are included, a model predicting intraoperative MT in patients undergoing liver transplantation is sufficiently accurate that its predictions could guide the blood order schedule for individual patients based on institutional data, thereby reducing the impact on blood bank resources. Ongoing evaluation of model accuracy and transfusion practices is required to ensure continuing performance of the predictive model.