Renal Autotransplantation: Association Between Preoperative Disease Duration and Surgical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early versus delayed autotransplantation are associated with adverse outcomes in patients undergoing renal autotransplantation. METHODS: Patients who underwent renal autotransplantation from June 2012 to September 2022 were divided into 2 groups based on timing of autotransplant in relation to initial intervention or diagnosis (early cohort: ≤1-year; delayed cohort: >1-year). Primary outcomes were perioperative complications, aborted surgery, renal function (glomerular filtration rate [GFR]), and postoperative complications at most recent follow-up. RESULTS: Autotransplantation patients (N = 72) were predominantly female (68%) and White (54%), with a median age of 49 years. Ninety percentage of patients had undergone previous interventions, including stenting (40%) and nephrostomy tubes (49%), primarily for obstruction (64%). Early versus delayed cohorts had median preoperative disease durations of 143 (IQR 83-222) versus 673 days (IQR 529-1703, P <.001), with similar median follow-up times (879 vs 818 days, P = .8). Groups were similar in demographics and comorbidities. There were no significant differences in rates of aborted surgery (15% vs 4.2%, P = .3), perioperative complications (15% vs 17%, P > .9), long-term complications (49% vs 48%, P > .9), or changes in GFR (median change +3 vs +4, P = .7). Outcomes were comparable across preoperative disease durations ranging from 6 to 24 months. These findings were confirmed following adjustments for sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, race, preoperative creatinine levels, laterality, gastroesophageal reflux disease, diabetes, hypertension, nephrolithiasis, hyperlipidemia, history of colon surgery, urologic surgery, abdominal surgery, and prior interventions in separate logistic models. CONCLUSION: Disease duration before autotransplantation does not influence outcomes, offering reassurance for clinical decision-making in complex cases.

Mismatched Postsurgical Opioid Prescription to Liver Transplant Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study From a Single High-volume Transplant Center.

BACKGROUND: Improper opioid prescription after surgery is a well-documented iatrogenic contributor to the current opioid epidemic in North America. In fact, opioids are known to be overprescribed to liver transplant patients, and liver transplant patients with high doses or prolonged postsurgical opioid use have higher risks of graft failure and death. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 552 opioid-naive patients undergoing liver transplant at an academic center between 2012 and 2019. The primary outcome was the discrepancy between the prescribed discharge opioid daily dose and each patient's own inpatient opioid consumption 24 h before discharge. Variables were analyzed with Wilcoxon and chi-square tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: Opioids were overprescribed in 65.9% of patients, and 54.3% of patients who required no opioids the day before discharge were discharged with opioid prescriptions. In contrast, opioids were underprescribed in 13.4% of patients, among whom 27.0% consumed inpatient opioids but received no discharge opioid prescription. The median prescribed opioid daily dose was 333.3% and 56.3% of the median inpatient opioid daily dose in opioid overprescribed and underprescribed patients, respectively. Importantly, opioid underprescribed patients had higher rates of opioid refill 1 to 30 and 31 to 90 d after discharge, and the rate of opioid underprescription more than doubled from 2016 to 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids are both over- and underprescribed to liver transplant patients, and opioid underprescribed patients had higher rates of opioid refill. Therefore, we proposed to prescribe discharge opioid prescriptions based on liver transplant patients' inpatient opioid consumption to provide patient-centered opioid prescriptions.

Therapeutic Living Donor Nephrectomy for Proximal Ureteral Pathology: A Longitudinal Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: To raise awareness that patients with proximal ureteral stricture who elect for nephrectomy can consider donating the kidney. We present a series of patients undergoing therapeutic living donor nephrectomy (TLDN), a scenario in which a patient undergoing nephrectomy for an underlying medical problem donates the kidney to a person with end-stage renal disease. This practice is underutilized, and only a single TLDN with proximal ureteral stricture has been previously described. We aim to help define the indications, risks, and benefits for patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of seven therapeutic donors with proximal ureteral pathology and stone disease. Patient characteristics, donor work up, operative details, and donor and recipient outcome were collected. RESULTS: All seven donors had proximal ureteral pathology, and six of the seven had nephrolithiasis or ureterolithiasis. After electing for nephrectomy, the mean time to TLDN was 57.9 days. No recipients experienced delayed graft function . Mean follow up was 40.1 months (range 8-131), and the most recent follow-up mean creatinine was 1.08 (mg/dL). Graft and recipient survival is 100%. No recipients developed recurrence of ureteral stricture or stones. CONCLUSION: This is the first series demonstrating patients with proximal ureteral stricture, even with concomitant stone disease, may donate kidneys for transplantation. Recipient outcomes suggest this practice is safe, and appropriately selected patients that have already elected for nephrectomy should receive counseling about this opportunity. Importantly, patients who donate a kidney receive waiting list priority if they ever need a kidney transplant in the future.

Motivations and outcomes of compatible living donor-recipient pairs in paired exchange.

Increasing numbers of compatible pairs are choosing to enter paired exchange programs, but motivations, outcomes, and system-level effects of participation are not well described. Using a linkage of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and National Kidney Registry, we compared outcomes of traditional (originally incompatible) recipients to originally compatible recipients using the Kaplan-Meier method. We identified 154 compatible pairs. Most pairs sought to improve HLA matching. Compared to the original donor, actual donors were younger (39 vs. 50 years, p < .001), less often female (52% vs. 68%, p < .01), higher BMI (27 vs. 25 kg/m², p = .03), less frequently blood type O (36% vs. 80%, p < .001), and had higher eGFR (99 vs. 94 ml/min/1.73 m², p = .02), with a better LKDPI (median 7 vs. 22, p < .001). We observed no differences in graft failure or mortality. Compatible pairs made 280 additional transplants possible, many in highly sensitized recipients with long wait times. Compatible pair recipients derived several benefits from paired exchange, including better donor quality. Living donor pairs should receive counseling regarding all options available, including kidney paired donation. As more compatible pairs choose to enter exchange programs, consideration should be given to optimizing compatible pair and hard-to-transplant recipient outcomes.

Preventing Recurrence in Clean and Contaminated Hernias Using Biologic Versus Synthetic Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair: The PRICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate which mesh type yields lower recurrence and complication rates after ventral hernia repair. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: More than 400,000 ventral hernia repairs are performed annually in the United States. Although the most effective method for repairing ventral hernias involves using mesh, whether to use biologic mesh versus synthetic mesh is controversial. METHODS: Single-blind, randomized, controlled, pragmatic clinical trial conducted from March 2014 through October 2018; 165 patients enrolled with an average follow up of 26 months. Patients were randomized 1:1 to have their ventral hernias repaired using either a biologic (porcine) or synthetic (polypropylene) mesh. The primary study outcome measure was hernia recurrence at 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (68 men), mean age 55 years, were included in the study with a mean follow-up of 26 months. An intention-to-treat analysis noted that hernias recurred in 25 patients (39.7%) assigned to biologic mesh and in 14 patients (21.9%) assigned to synthetic mesh (P = 0.035) at 2 years. Subgroup analysis identified an increased rate of hernia recurrence in the biologic versus the synthetic mesh group under contaminated wound conditions (50.0% vs 5.9%; P for interaction = 0.041). Postoperative complication rates were similar for the 2 mesh types. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of hernia recurrence was significantly higher for patients undergoing ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh compared to synthetic mesh, with similar rates of postoperative complications. These data indicate that the use of synthetic mesh over biologic mesh to repair ventral hernias is effective and can be endorsed, including under contaminated wound conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02041494.

A world-wide survey on kidney transplantation practices in breast cancer survivors: The need for new management guidelines.

Kidney transplantation reduces mortality in patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD). Decisions about performing kidney transplantation in the setting of a prior cancer are challenging, as cancer recurrence in the setting of immunosuppression can result in poor outcomes. For cancer of the breast, rapid advances in molecular characterization have allowed improved prognostication, which is not reflected in current guidelines. We developed a 19-question survey to determine transplant surgeons' knowledge, practice, and attitudes regarding guidelines for kidney transplantation in women with breast cancer. Of the 129 respondents from 32 states and 14 countries, 74.8% felt that current guidelines are inadequate. Surgeons outside the United States (US) were more likely to consider transplantation in a breast cancer patient without a waiting period (p = .017). Within the US, 29.2% of surgeons in the Western region would consider transplantation without a waiting period, versus 3.6% of surgeons in the East (p = .004). Encouragingly, 90.4% of providers surveyed would consider eliminating wait-times for women with a low risk of cancer recurrence based on the accurate prediction of molecular assays. These findings support the need for new guidelines incorporating individualized recurrence risk to improve care of ESRD patients with breast cancer.

Opioid use prior to liver transplant is associated with increased risk of death after transplant.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are generally discouraged and used sparingly in liver transplant (LT) candidates prior to LT. This study examined the relationship between opioid use at the time of LT and graft and patient survival following transplantation. METHODS: A retrospective single center cohort study of LT recipients from June 2012 to December 2019 was performed. Primary outcomes were graft and patient survival, analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models; primary predictor was active opioid prescription at LT. RESULTS: 751 LT recipients were included; 16% had an opioid prescription at LT. Post-transplant death was significantly greater in opioid users (pvalue<0.001). In a multivariable Cox model examining predictors of death, opioid use remained associated with a significant increase in the risk of death (HR 2.4 CI 1.5-4.0, p < 0.001) even after controlling for other factors. CONCLUSION: Opioid use at LT is associated with a markedly increased risk of death following transplant.

Advantages and Limitations of Clinical Scores for Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation.

Background: Scoring systems have been proposed to select donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors and recipients for liver transplantation (LT). We hypothesized that complex scoring systems derived in large datasets might not predict outcomes locally. Methods: Based on 1-year DCD-LT graft survival predictors in multivariate logistic regression models, we designed, validated, and compared a simple index using the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) cohort (n = 136) and a universal-comprehensive (UC)-DCD score using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) cohort (n = 5,792) to previously published DCD scoring systems. Results: The total warm ischemia time (WIT)-index included donor WIT (dWIT) and hepatectomy time (dHep). The UC-DCD score included dWIT, dHep, recipient on mechanical ventilation, transjugular-intrahepatic-portosystemic-shunt, cause of liver disease, model for end-stage liver disease, body mass index, donor/recipient age, and cold ischemia time. In the UNOS cohort, the UC-score outperformed all previously published scores in predicting DCD-LT graft survival (AUC: 0.635 vs. ≤0.562). In the UCSF cohort, the total WIT index successfully stratified survival and biliary complications, whereas other scores did not. Conclusion: DCD risk scores generated in large cohorts provide general guidance for safe recipient/donor selection, but they must be tailored based on non-/partially-modifiable local circumstances to expand DCD utilization.

Retransplantation After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Data from the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for primary liver transplantation (LT) may quell concerns about allocating deceased donor organs if the need for retransplantation (re-LT) arises because the primary LT did not draw from the limited organ pool. However, outcomes of re-LT after LDLT are poorly studied. The purpose of this study was to analyze the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Study (A2ALL) data to report outcomes of re-LT after LDLT, with a focus on long-term survival after re-LT. METHODS: A retrospective review of A2ALL data collected between 1998 and 2014 was performed. Patients were excluded if they received a deceased donor LT. Demographic data, postoperative outcomes and complications, graft and patient survival, and predictors of re-LT and patient survival were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1065 patients who underwent LDLT during the study time period, 110 recipients (10.3%) required re-LT. In multivariable analyses, hepatitis C virus, longer length of stay at LDLT, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary stricture, infection, and disease recurrence were associated with an increased risk of re-LT. Patient survival among re-LT patients was significantly inferior to those who underwent primary transplant only at 1 (86% versus 92%), 5 (64% versus 82%), and 10 years (44% versus 68%). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 10% of A2ALL patients who underwent primary LDLT required re-LT. Compared with patients who underwent primary LT, survival among re-LT recipients was worse at 1, 5, and 10 years after LT, and re-LT was associated with a significantly increased risk of death in multivariable modeling (hazard ratios, 2.29; P < 0.001).

Molecular Insights in Transmission of Cancer From an Organ Donor to Four Transplant Recipients.

Organ donors are systematically screened for infection, whereas screening for malignancy is less rigorous. The true incidence of donor-transmitted malignancies is unknown due to a lack of universal tumor testing in the posttransplant setting. Donor-transmitted malignancy may occur even when not suspected based on donor or recipient factors, including age and time to cancer diagnosis. We describe the detection of a gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma transmitted from a young donor to 4 transplant recipients. Multidimensional histopathologic and genomic profiling showed a CDH1 mutation and MET amplification, consistent with gastric origin. At the time of writing, one patient in this series remains alive and without evidence of cancer after prompt organ explant after cancer was reported in other recipients. Because identification of a donor-derived malignancy changes management, our recommendation is to routinely perform short tandem repeat testing (or a comparable assay) immediately upon diagnosis of cancer in any organ transplant recipient. Routine testing for a donor-origin cancer and centralized reporting of outcomes are necessary to establish a robust evidence base for the future development of clinical practice guidelines.

Inferior Long-Term Graft Survival of Suboptimal Kidneys After Living Donor Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In living donors, if both kidneys are considered to be of equal quality, the side with favorable anatomy for transplant is usually selected. A "suboptimal kidney" is a kidney that has a significant abnormality and is chosen to maintain the principle of leaving the better kidney with the donor. We hypothesized that the long-term outcome of suboptimal kidney is inferior to that of the normal kidney. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 1744 living donor kidney transplantations performed between 1999 and 2015 at our institution, 172 allografts were considered as a suboptimal kidney (9.9%). Median length of follow-up after living donor kidney transplantation was 59.5 months (interquartile range 26.3-100.8). This study strictly complied with the Helsinki Congress and the Istanbul Declaration regarding donor source. RESULTS: The reasons for suboptimal kidneys were cysts or tumors (46.5%), arterial abnormalities (22.7%), inferior size or function (19.8%), and anatomic abnormalities (11.0%). Suboptimal kidneys showed worse long-term overall graft survival regardless of the reasons (5-year: control vs suboptimal kidney; 88.9% vs 79.3%, P = .001 and 10-year: 73.6% vs 63.5%, P = .004). Suboptimal kidneys showed a 1.6-fold higher adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause graft loss (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.5, P = .025) and had the same impact as older donor age (≥ 54 years old, aHR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: The impact of suboptimal kidney should be factored into the donor selection process.

Fatigue, Pain, and Other Physical Symptoms of Living Liver Donors in the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study.

Little is known about living liver donors' perceptions of their physical well-being following the procedure. We collected data on donor fatigue, pain, and other relevant physical outcomes as part of the prospective, multicenter Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study consortium. A total of 271 (91%) of 297 eligible donors were interviewed at least once before donation and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after donation using validated measures when available. Repeated measures regression models were used to identify potential predictors of worse physical outcomes. We found that donors reported more fatigue immediately after surgery that improved by 2 years after donation, but not to predonation levels. A similar pattern was seen across a number of other physical outcomes. Abdominal or back pain and interference from their pain were rated relatively low on average at all study points. However, 21% of donors did report clinically significant pain at some point during postdonation study follow-up. Across multiple outcomes, female donors, donors whose recipients died, donors with longer hospital stays after surgery, and those whose families discouraged donation were at risk for worse physical well-being outcomes. In conclusion, although not readily modifiable, we have identified risk factors that may help identify donors at risk for worse physical outcomes for targeted intervention. Liver Transplantation 00 000-000 2018 AASLD.

De novo thyroid cancer following solid organ transplantation-A 25-year experience at a high-volume institution with a review of the literature.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We investigated the rate, stage, and prognosis of thyroid cancer in patients after solid-organ transplantations, and compared this to the general population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients who developed thyroid cancer after a solid-organ transplantation between January 1988 and December 2013 at a high volume transplant center. Standardized Incidence Ratio's (SIR) were calculated. Additionally, a systematic review of the literature was performed. RESULTS: A total of 10,428 patients underwent solid organ transplantation. Eleven patients (11.4 per 100,000 person-years) developed thyroid cancer: six men and five women with a mean age at diagnosis of thyroid cancer of 58 years. Ten patients underwent surgery and had stage I thyroid cancer. One patient had recurrent disease after a mean follow-up time of 78 months. The SIR varied between 0.75 and 2.3. Seventeen studies were included in the systematic review with a SIR ranging from 2.5 to 35. CONCLUSION: Rate of thyroid cancer is not significantly higher in patients who underwent solid organ transplantation compared to general population. Stage at presentation and prognosis also appear to be similar to that of the general population. Post-transplant screening for thyroid cancer remains debatable; however, when thyroid cancer is discovered, treatment should be similar to that of non-transplant patients. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017;115:105-108. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Defining long-term outcomes with living donor liver transplantation in North America.

OBJECTIVES: To compare long-term survival of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) at experienced transplant centers with outcomes of deceased donor liver transplant and identify key variables impacting patient and graft survival. BACKGROUND: The Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study is a prospective multicenter National Institutes of Health study comparing outcomes of LDLT and deceased donor liver transplant and associated risks. METHODS: Mortality and graft failure for 1427 liver recipients (963 LDLT) enrolled in the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study who received transplant between January 1, 1998, and January 31, 2014, at 12 North American centers with median follow-up 6.7 years were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox models. RESULTS: Survival probability at 10 years was 70% for LDLT and 64% for deceased donor liver transplant. Unadjusted survival was higher with LDLT (hazard ratio = 0.76, P = 0.02) but attenuated after adjustment (hazard ratio = 0.98, P = 0.90) as LDLT recipients had lower mean model for end-stage liver disease (15.5 vs 20.4) and fewer received transplant from intensive care unit, were inpatient, on dialysis, were ventilated, or with ascites. Posttransplant intensive care unit days were less for LDLT recipients. For all recipients, female sex and primary sclerosing cholangitis were associated with improved survival, whereas dialysis and older recipient/donor age were associated with worse survival. Higher model for end-stage liver disease score was associated with increased graft failure. Era of transplantation and type of donated lobe did not impact survival in LDLT. CONCLUSIONS: LDLT provides significant long-term transplant benefit, resulting in transplantation at a lower model for end-stage liver disease score, decreased death on waitlist, and excellent posttransplant outcomes. Recipient diagnosis, disease severity, renal failure, and ages of recipient and donor should be considered in decision making regarding timing of transplant and donor options.Clinical Trials ID: NCT00096733.

Ex vivo split-liver transplantation: the true right/left split.

BACKGROUND: Successful left lateral segment (sectionectomy) and right trisegmentectomy (trisectionectomy) split-liver transplantation (SLT) have been achieved. However, there are few reports of the use of true right/left splitting in SLT. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective review of true right/left ex vivo split-liver transplants performed during the period 1993-2010 was conducted. Nine cadaveric liver grafts underwent splitting and the resultant 18 allografts were used in transplants performed at the study centre. RESULTS: In the nine right lobe recipients, 10-year patient and graft survival rates were both 74%. There were no vascular complications, one biliary complication and one re-exploration. In the nine left lobe recipients, 10-year patient and graft survival rates were 78% and 66%, respectively. Postoperative complications included six biliary complications, four of which required surgical revision and all of which occurred within 5 months of transplantation, and two vascular complications, including one early hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) and one late HAT, one of which required retransplantation. Five left lobe recipients required re-exploration, and one patient developed small-for-size syndrome following SLT, which resolved with conservative measures. CONCLUSIONS: True right/left ex vivo SLT remains a viable option for facilitating the expansion of the adult cadaver donor pool and allows for excellent patient and graft survival. Postoperative morbidity remains high, especially in recipients of the left lobe graft, and must be balanced with the benefits to be derived from transplant.

Multicenter review of liver transplant for hepatitis B-related liver disease: disparities in gender and ethnicity.

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is the preferred treatment for selected patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related liver disease. This study aimed to (i) define long-term outcomes following OLT for HBV; (ii) to quantify the incidence of HBV recurrence (rHBV) as it relates to anti-HBV treatment; and (iii) to determine outcomes for specific patient subgroups. We performed a retrospective chart review of 738 patients undergoing OLT between 1985 and 2010 at seven US transplant centers and divided the patients into 3 eras, 1985-1994, 1995-2004, and 2005-2010, based on hepatitis B immunoglobulin and antiviral therapies. In Era 3, female gender (p = 0.002), recurrent hepatocellular cancer (p < 0.001), and retransplantation (p = 0.01) were significantly associated with worse survival on multivariate analysis. Survival at three yr was poor for all ethnicities in Era 1, but significantly improved for all except black Americans by Era 3. Era 2 data showed a continued increase in rHBV from five to 10 yr (16.6%, 26.2%). In conclusion, while OLT outcomes have improved because of combination antiviral and immunoglobulin therapy, women and black Americans may not have realized an equal benefit. The rate of rHBV is significant even 10 yr post-transplant with survival affected.

Liver transplantation for hepatitis B liver disease and concomitant hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States With hepatitis B immunoglobulin and nucleoside/nucleotide analogues.

Reinfection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) after liver transplantation (LT) may favor the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and combination therapy with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleoside/nucleotide analogues may reduce HBV recurrence after LT. To test associations between HBV, HCC, and survival, we performed a retrospective chart review of patients undergoing LT for HBV between January 1985 and December 2010 at 7 US transplant centers. After we divided the patients into 3 eras based on evolving strategies in antiviral therapy (1985-1994, 1995-2004, and 2005-2010), we reviewed 16 variables to determine whether there were associations between survival and HCC recurrence. Seven hundred thirty-eight patients underwent transplantation for HBV, and 354 (48.0%) had concomitant HCC, which recurred in 58 patients (16.4%). Three-year survival was much better in era 3 versus era 1 (87% versus 40%, P = 0.001), and the incidence of HCC recurrence was lower (12% versus 29%, P = 0.009). The lungs were the most frequent first site of HCC recurrence, and they were followed by the liver. A multivariate analysis showed that HBV reinfection, HCC recurrence, and HBIG use were associated with worse survival (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.002, respectively); HCC recurrence and stage 3 HCC, among other factors, were associated with HBV reinfection (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004); and stage 3 HCC, vascular invasion of the explanted tumor, and post-LT chemotherapy were associated with HCC recurrence (P = 0.008, P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively). Patients with HBV reinfection were 3.6 times more likely than patients without HBV to have HCC recurrence. These data suggest further study of attempts at LT for patients with HBV and HCC beyond the Milan criteria if their HBV is aggressively and successfully treated.

Development, management, and resolution of biliary complications after living and deceased donor liver transplantation: a report from the adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study consortium.

Adult recipients of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have a higher incidence of biliary complications than recipients of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Our objective was to define the intensity of the interventions and the time to resolution after the diagnosis of biliary complications after liver transplantation. We analyzed the management and resolution of posttransplant biliary complications and investigated the comparative effectiveness of interventions in LDLT and DDLT recipients. For the analysis of biliary complications (leaks or strictures), we used a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent liver transplantation at 8 centers between 1998 and 2006 (median follow-up from onset=4.7 years). The numbers, procedure types, and times to resolution were compared for LDLT and DDLT recipients. Posttransplant biliary complications occurred in 47 of the 189 DDLT recipients (25%) and in 141 of the 356 LDLT recipients (40%). Biliary leaks constituted 38% of the post-DDLT biliary complications (n=18) and 65% of the post-LDLT biliary complications (n=91). The median times to first biliary complications were similar for DDLT and LDLT (11 versus 14 days for leaks, P=0.63; 69 versus 107 days for strictures, P=0.34). Overall, 1225 diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, including reoperation and retransplantation, were performed (6.5±5.4 per recipient; 5.5±3.6 for DDLT versus 6.8±5.8 for LDLT, P=0.52). The median number of months to the resolution of a biliary complication (i.e., a tube-, stent-, and drain-free status) did not significantly differ between the DDLT and LDLT groups for leaks (2.3 versus 1.3 months, P=0.29) or strictures (4.9 versus 2.3 months, P=0.61). Although the incidence of biliary complications is higher after LDLT versus DDLT, the treatment requirements and the time to resolution after the development of a biliary complication are similar for LDLT and DDLT recipients.

Risk factors for liver transplant waitlist dropout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Loco-regional therapy has been developed to reduce waitlist dropout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation. We evaluated the probability of transplantation and waitlist dropout, and analyzed risk factors for waitlist dropout, in 76 patients with HCC from September 2004 to August 2006. Seventy-three (96.1%) patients received one or more preoperative loco-regional treatments and 55 (72.3%) received an orthotopic liver transplantation with a median wait time of seven months (range, 2-26 months). There were 11 dropouts (14.5%) associated with tumor progression or hepatic decompensation (median waiting time; 5.4 months and range, 0.4-13 months). Cumulative probabilities of transplantation at three, six, nine, 12, 15, and 18 months were 5.4%, 35.4%, 67.5%, 78.8%, 80.7%, and 80.7%, respectively and those of waitlist dropout at three, six, nine, 12, 15, and 18 months were 3.9%, 8.7%, 12.8%, 22.9%, 29.3%, and 29.3%, respectively. A laboratory model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score >15 or multiple tumors at the time of UNOS listing were significant risk factors for waitlist dropout (p = 0.006 and 0.026, respectively). Patients with HCC being managed with loco-regional therapy who have a laboratory MELD score >15 or multiple tumors should be considered for earlier access to liver transplantation to prevent waitlist dropout.