Improving outcomes of in situ split liver transplantation in Italy over the last 25 years.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Split liver transplant(ation) (SLT) is still considered a challenging procedure that is by no means widely accepted. We aimed to present data on 25-year trends in SLT in Italy, and to investigate if, and to what extent, outcomes have improved nationwide during this time. METHODS: The study included all consecutive SLTs performed from May 1993 to December 2019, divided into three consecutive periods: 1993-2005, 2006-2014, and 2015-2019, which match changes in national allocation policies. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival, and the relative impact of each study period. RESULTS: SLT accounted for 8.9% of all liver transplants performed in Italy. A total of 1,715 in situ split liver grafts were included in the analysis: 868 left lateral segments (LLSs) and 847 extended right grafts (ERGs). A significant improvement in patient and graft survival (p <0.001) was observed with ERGs over the three periods. Predictors of graft survival were cold ischaemia time (CIT) <6 h (p = 0.009), UNOS status 2b (p <0.001), UNOS status 3 (p = 0.009), and transplant centre volumes: 25-50 cases vs. <25 cases (p = 0.003). Patient survival was significantly higher with LLS grafts in period 2 vs. period 1 (p = 0.008). No significant improvement in graft survival was seen over the three periods, where predictors of graft survival were CIT <6 h (p = 0.007), CIT <6 h vs. ≥10 h (p = 0.019), UNOS status 2b (p = 0.038), and UNOS status 3 (p = 0.009). Retransplantation was a risk factor in split liver graft recipients, with significantly worse graft and patient survival for both types of graft (p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed Italian SLT outcomes to have improved over the last 25 years. These results could help to dispel reservations regarding the use of this procedure. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Split liver transplant(ation) (SLT) is still considered a challenging procedure and is by no means widely accepted. This study included all consecutive in situ SLTs performed in Italy from May 1993 to December 2019. With more than 1,700 cases, it is one of the largest series, examining long-term national trends in in situ SLT since its introduction. The data presented indicate that the outcomes of SLT improved during this 25-year period. Improvements are probably due to better recipient selection, refinements in surgical technique, conservative graft-to-recipient matching, and the continuous, yet carefully managed, expansion of donor selection criteria under a strict mandatory split liver allocation policy. These results could help to dispel reservations regarding the use of this procedure.

State of pediatric liver transplantation in the United States and achieving zero wait list mortality with ideal outcomes: A statement from the Starzl Network for Excellence in Pediatric Transplant Surgeon's Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplant is a life-saving therapy that can restore quality life for several pediatric liver diseases. However, it is not available to all children who need one. Expertise in medical and surgical management is heterogeneous, and allocation policies are not optimally serving children. Technical variant grafts from both living and deceased donors are underutilized. METHODS: Several national efforts in pediatric liver transplant to improve access to and outcomes from liver transplant for children have been instituted and include adjustments to allocation policies, UNOS-sponsored collaborative improvement projects, and the emergence of national learning networks to study ongoing challenges in the field the Surgical Working group of the Starzl Network for Excellence in Pediatric Transplantation (SNEPT) discusses key issues and proposes potential solutions to eliminate the persistent wait list mortality that pediatric patients face. RESULTS: A discussion of the factors impacting pediatric patients' access to liver transplant is undertaken, along with a proposal of several measures to ensure equitable access to life-saving liver transplant. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric liver transplant wait list mortality can and should be eliminated. Several measures, including collaborative efforts among centers, could be leveraged to acheive this goal.

Internal split liver transplants reduce the waiting list time for teenagers with a low calculated Model for End-stage Liver Disease score.

BACKGROUND: Split liver transplantation allows for the simultaneous transplantation of two patients, typically a child and an adult, with a single organ. We report our experience with "internal splits" in which 10 pediatric patients from our institution were transplanted with five organs. We hypothesized that this would reduce the WL time for teenagers with a low calculated MELD score. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of those 10 patients was done. Their WL time was compared with local, regional, and national data. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The median age of the five primary recipients to whom the liver was first allocated was 2.3 years (0.7-7.4) (median weight 10.4 kg (8.4-17.7)). They received a segment 2-3 graft. Five "secondary" recipients (median age 17.4 years (16.6-18.9); median weight 66.2 kg (53.7-70.0)) were identified on our WL to receive the trisector graft. At transplant, their median calculated MELD score was 11 (8-20). Their mean WL time (241.6 ± 218.9 days) was significantly shorter than local (480.6 ± 833.6 days), regional (370.4 ± 563.4 days), and national patients (245.6 ± 465.4 days) with MELD ≤ 20 (P = .047). There was no significant difference between their WL time and that of patients with a MELD 8 ≤ x≤31 (equivalent to their median exception score, P = .63). Patient and graft survival was 100% for all 10 patients. CONCLUSION: In our experience, simultaneous internal split liver transplantation allowed teenagers with a low calculated MELD score to be transplanted faster than patients with a similar score. Promoting the use of internal split liver transplantation could help reduce the pediatric waitlist mortality.

Split versus living-related adult liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND-OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of split liver transplantation between recipients of deceased donor split liver transplant (SLT) or live donor liver transplants (LDLT) have never been compared in meta-analysis. It is important to understand graft and recipient survival between recipients of these grafts. METHODS: Databases were searched for relevant articles over the previous 20 years (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar). Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed- and random-effects models. Patient survival and graft survival were obtained using the inverse variance hazard ratio method. RESULTS: There were differences in the characteristics of the donors and recipients. Donors of the SLT were younger compared to LDLT cohort [mean difference (MD) = - 11.12 years (- 15.41 to - 6.84), p < 0.001] whilst recipients of LDLT were younger [MD = - 2.06 years (- 1.12 to - 3.01), p < 0.001]. Significantly fewer men received grafts after SLT, 45%, compared to those receiving LDLT, 55%, [OR = 0.66 (0.55 to 0.80), p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences detected in postoperative complications, graft and patient 1-, 3- and 5-year survival between the SLT and LDLT cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: There is no apparent difference in overall survival, graft survival or complications between recipients of SLT or LDLT. However, characteristics of the donor and recipients differed suggesting the need for adequate risk-adjusted assessment of outcomes.

Split liver transplant recipients do not have an increased frequency of acute kidney injury.

Small series have suggested that split liver transplantation (SLT) has an increased frequency of peri-operative acute kidney injury (AKI). However, the optimal donor selection in this setting could have a favourable impact on renal outcomes. This was a retrospective single-centre study of 76 adults who underwent SLT (right extended lobe) and 301 adults who underwent elective full-size donation after brain death liver transplantation (FSLT). SLT recipients were less likely than unmatched FSLT recipients to develop AKI (≥stage 1 KDIGO criteria) (40.3% vs. 56.1%, P = 0.016) and had a reduced frequency of renal replacement therapy (11.8% vs. 21.9%, P = 0.049). In 72 pairs of SLT patients and propensity risk score-matched FSLT controls the incidence of AKI was not significantly different (40.3% vs. 47.2%, P = 0.473). However, SLT patients were less likely to require renal replacement therapy (11.1% vs. 23.6%, P = 0.078; adjusted OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.11-0.87, P = 0.026). There was no association between SLT and the development of chronic kidney disease (eGFR<60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) , log rank P = 0.534). In conclusion, SLT is not associated with an increased frequency of AKI. These observations support the postulation that the optimal donor status of SLT may result in less graft injury with renal sparing effects.

Unconventional Strategies for Solid Organ Transplantation and Special Transplantation Scenarios.

Solid organ transplantation is the only long-term therapeutic option for patients with end-organ failure but cadaveric and living donor transplant pools are unable to meet the demand for organ transplantation. Newer techniques, innovative strategies and altruistic donors can help bridge this wide gap between the number of organ donors and recipients. Domino liver transplantation, paired organ donation, and ABO incompatible transplants are some of the ways to ensure increased transplant organ availability. Split liver transplantation and ex vivo liver resection and auto transplantation are considered surgically challenging but are being done at tertiary transplant centers.

Liver transplantation in Latin America: reality and challenges.

Healthcare systems in Latin America are broadly heterogeneous, but all of them are burdened by a dramatic rise in liver disease. Some challenges that these countries face include an increase in patients requiring a transplant, insufficient rates of organ donation, delayed referral, and inequitable or suboptimal access to liver transplant programs and post-transplant care. This could be improved by expanding the donor pool through the implementation of education programs for citizens and referring physicians, as well as the inclusion of extended criteria donors, living donors and split liver transplantation. Addressing these shortcomings will require national shifts aimed at improving infrastructure, increasing awareness of organ donation, training medical personnel, and providing equitable access to care for all patients.

Pediatric Liver Transplantation.

Liver transplantation (LT) for children results in excellent short- and long-term patient and graft survival. LT is a lifesaving procedure in children with acute or chronic liver disease, hepatic tumors, and select genetic metabolic diseases in which it can significantly improve quality of life. In this article, the authors discuss the unique aspects of pediatric LT, including the indications, appropriate patient selection and evaluation, allocation of organs, transplant surgery including the use of variant grafts, posttransplant care including immunosuppression management, prognosis, and transition of care.

Right lobe split liver graft versus whole liver transplantation: A systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Advancements in surgical techniques and experience of donor-recipient pairing has led to a wider use of right split liver grafts in adults. An update meta-analysis was conducted to compare right split liver graft (RSLG) and whole liver transplantation (WLT) using traditional and cumulative approaches. METHODS: Databases were searched for relevant articles over the previous 20 years (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar). Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed and random effects models. Patient and graft survival were obtained using the inverse variance hazard ratio method. RESULTS: Donors were significantly younger in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = -12.06 [-16.29 to -7.83]; P < .001). In addition, the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was significantly lower in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = -2.45 [-4.61 to -.28]; P = .03). However, cold ischaemia time was significantly longer by 1 h in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = 57 [20.63-92.73]; P = .002). Overall biliary, vascular, and outflow tract complications and hepatic artery thrombosis were significantly lower in the WLT group than in the RSLG group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.75 [1.35-2.27], P < .001; OR = 1.91 [1.37-2.65], P = .006; Peto OR = 1.83 [1.19-2.82], P = .006; and Peto OR = 2.07 [1.39-3.10], P = .004, respectively). However, no difference in patient and graft survival was noted between the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Although the RSLG group had a higher postoperative complication rate than the WLT group, equal patient and graft survival benefits were observed.

The use of splenic artery embolization to maintain adequate hepatic arterial inflow after hepatic artery thrombosis in a split liver transplant recipient.

INTRODUCTION: Split liver transplant is gaining increasing use in the current environment of growing organ shortage. It is associated with a higher risk of complications, owing to its complexity and technical challenges. Splenic artery steal syndrome, is a complication that can occur following liver transplant and cause inadequate hepatic arterial inflow, hepatic artery thrombosis and graft loss. We report a successful management of hepatic artery thrombosis and splenic artery steal syndrome after a split liver transplant by surgical thrombectomy followed by angiography and splenic artery embolization. CASE: 60-year old female, with liver cirrhosis, who underwent a deceased donor right lobe orthotopic liver transplant. The procedure was complicated by hepatic artery thrombosis, requiring re-exploration. However, despite anastomotic revision the patient had poor hepatic arterial inflow. Both angiography and ultrasonography demonstrated splenic artery steal syndrome. This was successfully managed by splenic artery embolization with improved hepatic artery flow on ultrasonography and angiography. CONCLUSION: Splenic artery steal syndrome is a rare complication that can occur after a liver transplant. Experience with this phenomenon is limited in split liver transplantation.We demonstrated successful early management of splenic artery steal syndrome with coil embolization in a split liver transplant preventing further morbidity and graft loss.