Derivation and Validation of a Model to Predict Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension Using Transient Elastography and FIB-4.

BACKGROUND: Liver biopsy and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), the gold standard for assessing advanced fibrosis (AF) and clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH), are invasive, costly, and time-consuming. GOAL: We investigated if the combination of fibrosis index based on 4 factors (FIB-4) and liver stiffness measure (LSM) can identify AF and more importantly, CSPH. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with chronic liver disease referred for transjugular liver biopsy were analyzed retrospectively. FIB-4 and LSM were compared with liver histology for diagnosing AF. FIB-4, LSM, and platelet count were compared with HVPG for diagnosing CSPH. Optimal cutoffs for predicting CSPH were determined by grid search. A composite log-odds to predict CSPH was derived from logistic regression using LSM, FIB-4, and gender. Internal bootstrap validation and external validation were performed. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were included in the derivation; 42.3% had AF, and 11.3% had CSPH using the current gold standards. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for LSM, FIB-4, and their combination to predict AF were 0.7550, 0.7049, and 0.7768, respectively. LSM, FIB-4, and platelet count predicted CSPH with AUROC 0.6818, 0.7532, and 0.7240, respectively. LSM plus FIB-4 showed the best performance in predicting CSPH with AUROC 0.8155. Based on LSM, FIB-4, and gender, a novel model-the Portal Hypertension Assessment Tool (PHAT)-was developed to predict CSPH. PHAT score ≥-2.76 predicted CSPH with sensitivity 94%, specificity 67%, positive predictive value 27%, negative predictive value 99%, and accuracy 70%. In internal and external validation, AUROCs for the model were 0.8293 and 0.7899, respectively. CONCLUSION: A model consisting of FIB-4, LSM, and gender can identify CSPH among patients with chronic liver disease.

Obesity does not significantly impact outcomes following simultaneous liver kidney transplantation: review of the UNOS database - a retrospective study.

Simultaneous liver kidney transplantation (SLK) is the only curative option for patients with combined end stage liver and kidney disease. With the global obesity epidemic, an increasing number of obese patients are in need of SLK. However, the impact of pre-transplant obesity on outcomes after SLK is unknown. An analysis of the United States OPTN registry (Oct 1987 - June 2016) identified 7205 SLK transplants. Of these, 1677 patients were overweight/obese (OW, BMI 30-39) and 183 were morbidly obese (MO, BMI ≥40). 29% of patients had NASH in the MO group versus 16.4% and 4.7% in the OW and normal weight (NW) groups, respectively. The 1, 3 and 5 year overall patient survival, kidney and liver graft survivals were comparable between the three groups. Numerically higher rates of acute kidney rejection were reported in the MO group at 1 year [12.73%, 8.59%, and 10.05% for MO, OW and NW, respectively (P = 0.22)]. Multivariate analysis identified diagnosis of hepatitis C, donor age, diabetes mellitus, and delayed kidney transplant function but not BMI as risk factors for poor patient and both liver and kidney graft survival. Based on these findings, obesity should not be a contraindication for SLK even for patients with BMIs ≥ 40.

Long-term outcomes and transmission rates in hepatitis C virus-positive donor to hepatitis C virus-negative kidney transplant recipients: Analysis of United States national data.

The use of kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive (D+) deceased donors for HCV-negative recipients (R-) might increase the donor pool. We analyzed the national Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN) registry from 1994 to 2014 to compare the outcomes of HCV D+/R- (n = 421) to propensity-matched HCV-negative donor (D-)/R- kidney transplants, as well as with waitlisted patients who never received a transplant, in a 1:5 ratio (n = 2105, per matched group). Both 5-year graft survival (44% vs 66%; P < .001) and patient survival (57% vs 79%; P < .001) were inferior for D+/R- group compared to D-/R-. Nevertheless, 5-year patient survival from the time of wait listing was superior for D+/R- when compared to waitlisted controls (68% vs 43%; P < .001). Of the 126 D+/R- with available post-transplant HCV testing, HCV seroconversion was confirmed in 62 (49%), likely donor-derived. Five-year outcomes were similar between D+/R- that seroconverted vs D+/R- that did not (n = 64). Our analysis shows inferior outcomes for D+/R- patients although detailed data on pretransplant risk factors was not available. Limited data suggest that HCV transmission occurred in half of HCV D+/R- patients, although this might not have been the primary factor contributing to the poor observed outcomes.

High- Versus Low-Energy Acetabular Fracture Outcomes in the Geriatric Population.

INTRODUCTION: High-energy mechanisms of acetabular fracture in the geriatric population are becoming increasingly common as older adults remain active later in life. This study compared outcomes for high- versus low-energy acetabular fractures in older adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied outcomes of 22 older adults with acetabular fracture who were treated at a level-I trauma center over a 4-year period. Fourteen patients were categorized as low-energy mechanism of injury, and 8 were identified as a high-energy mechanism. We analyzed patient demographics with univariate logistic regressions performed to assess differences in high- and low-energy group as well as patient characteristics compared with surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Most high-energy mechanisms were caused by motor vehicle collision (n = 4, 50.0%), with most having posterior wall fractures (50.0%). Among patient characteristics, the mechanism of injury, hip dislocation, fracture types, and fracture gap had the largest differences between energy groups effect size (ES: 2.45, 1.43, 1.36, and 0.83, respectively). The high-energy group was more likely to require surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 2.80, 95% CI: 0.26-30.70), develop heterotopic bone (OR = 4.33, 95% CI: 0.33-57.65), develop arthritis (OR = 3.60, 95% CI: 0.45-28.56), and had longer time to surgery (mean = 4.8 days, standard deviation [SD] = 5.8 days) compared to low-energy group (mean = 2.5 days, SD = 2.3 days). DISCUSSION: The results of this case series confirm previous findings that patients with high-energy acetabular fractures are predominantly male, younger, and have fewer comorbidities than those who sustained low-energy fractures. Our results demonstrate that the majority of the high-energy fracture patients also suffered a concurrent hip dislocation with posterior wall fracture and experienced a longer time to surgery than the low-energy group. CONCLUSION: Geriatric patients who sustained high-energy acetabular fractures tend to have higher overall rates of complications, including infection, traumatic arthritis, and heterotopic bone formation when compared with patients with a low-energy fracture mechanism.

Impact of Induction Immunosuppression Strategies in Simultaneous Liver/Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: There is scant data on the use of induction immunosuppression for simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation (SLKT). METHODS: We analyzed the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network registry from 1996 to 2016 to compare outcomes of SLKT, based on induction immunosuppression. RESULTS: Of 5172 patients, 941 (18%) received T-cell depletion induction, 1635 (32%) received interleukin 2 receptor antagonist (IL2-RA), and 2596 (50%) received no induction (NI). At 5 years, patient survivals were 68% in the T-cell group, 74% in the IL2-RA group, and 71% in the NI group (P = 0.0006). Five-year liver and kidney allograft survivals were 67% and 64% in the T-cell group, 73% and 70% in the IL2-RA group, and 70% and 68% in the NI group (P = 0.001 and 0.003), respectively. On multivariate analysis, the type of induction had no impact on patient or allograft survival. Maintenance steroids and calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) at discharge were associated with improved patient and graft survival (steroids: patient survival hazard ratio [HR] 0.37 [0.27-0.52], liver survival HR 0.43 [0.31-0.59], kidney survival HR 0.46 [0.34-0.63]; P < 0.0001, CNI: patient survival HR 0.3 [0.21-0.43], liver survival HR 0.3 [0.2-0.44], kidney survival HR 0.4 [0.26-0.59]; P < 0.0001). CNI maintenance in patients who received T-cell induction was associated with decreased patient, liver, and kidney allograft survivals (respective HR: 1.4 [1.1, 1.8]; 1.5 [1.1, 1.9]; 1.3 [1.08, 1.7]; P < 0.05) CONCLUSION.: Induction immunosuppression had no impact on patient and allograft survival in SLKT, while maintenance steroids and CNI were associated with improved patient and graft survivals. Given the inherent limitations of a registry analysis, these findings should be interpreted with caution.