Combined heart-liver transplantation practices survey in North America: Evaluation and organ listing practices.

We conducted a web-based survey to characterize liver transplant (LT) evaluation and listing practices for patients being evaluated for combined heart-liver transplantation (CHLT), with a specific emphasis on patients with congenital heart disease (CHD), around transplant centers in North America. Very few protocols for liver evaluation and listing in patients undergoing combined heart-liver transplantation are published, and no guidelines currently exist on this topic. A subject of intense debate in the transplant community is the decision of which patients with CHD and liver disease benefit from CHLT compared with heart transplantation. A focus group from the American Society of Transplantation Liver-Intestine Community of Practice Education Subcommittee developed a web-based survey that included questions (1) respondee demographic information; (2) LT evaluation practices in CHLT; (3) liver organ listing practices in CHLT, and (4) 4 clinical vignettes with case-based scenarios in CHLT liver listings among CHD patients who underwent Fontan palliation. The survey was distributed to medical and surgical LT program directors of 47 centers that had completed at least 1 CHLT up to July 2021 in the US and the University of Toronto, Canada. The survey had an excellent 83% response rate (87% for centers that completed at least 1 CHLT in the past 5 y). Total 66.7% used transjugular liver biopsy with HVPG measurements, 30% used percutaneous liver biopsy with no consensus on the use of a fibrosis staging system, 95% mandated contrasted cross-sectional imaging, and 65% upper endoscopy. The following isolated findings evaluation mandated CHLT listing: isolated elevated HVPG (61.5%); the presence of portosystemic collaterals on imaging (67.5%); the endoscopic presence of esophageal or gastric varices (75%), and the presence of HCC (80%), whereas the majority of centers did not feel that the presence of isolated splenomegaly (100%), thrombocytopenia (81.6%), endoscopic findings of portal hypertensive gastropathy (66.7%), or highly sensitized patients (84.6%) justified CHLT. In our survey of North American centers that had performed at least 1 CHLT in the past 5 years, we observed heterogeneity in practices for both evaluation and listing protocols in these patients.

Quantification of the Hemodynamic Changes of Cirrhosis with Free-Breathing Self-Navigated MRI.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive assessment of the hemodynamic changes of cirrhosis might help guide management of patients with liver disease but are currently limited. PURPOSE: To determine whether free-breathing 4D flow MRI can be used to quantify the hemodynamic effects of cirrhosis and introduce hydraulic circuit indexes of severity. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: Forty-seven patients including 26 with cirrhosis. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T/free-breathing 4D flow MRI with soft gating and golden-angle view ordering. ASSESSMENT: Measurements of the supra-celiac abdominal aorta, supra-renal abdominal aorta (SRA), celiac trunk (CeT), superior mesenteric artery (SMA), splenic artery (SpA), common hepatic artery (CHA), portal vein (PV), and supra-renal inferior vena cava (IVC) were made by two radiologists. Measures of hepatic vascular resistance (hepatic arterial relative resistance [HARR]; portal resistive index [PRI]) were proposed and calculated. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Bland-Altman, Pearson's correlation, Tukey's multiple comparison, and Cohen's kappa. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Forty-four of 47 studies yielded adequate image quality for flow quantification (94%). Arterial structures showed high inter-reader concordance (range; ρ = 0.948-0.987) and the IVC (ρ = 0.972), with moderate concordance in the PV (ρ = 0.866). Conservation of mass analysis showed concordance between large vessels (SRA vs. IVC; ρ = 0.806), small vessels (celiac vs. CHA + SpA; ρ = 0.939), and across capillary beds (CeT + SMA vs. PV; ρ = 0.862). Splanchnic flow was increased in patients with portosystemic shunting (PSS) relative to control patients and patients with cirrhosis without PSS (P < 0.05, difference range 0.11-0.68 liter/m). HARR was elevated and PRI was decreased in patients with PSS (3.55 and 1.49, respectively) compared to both the control (2.11/3.18) and non-PSS (2.11/2.35) cohorts. DATA CONCLUSION: 4D flow MRI with self-navigation was technically feasible, showing promise in quantifying the hemodynamic effects of cirrhosis. Proposed quantitative metrics of hepatic vascular resistance correlated with PSS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.