Quality measures in pre-liver transplant care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.

The liver frailty index is a predictor of healthcare utilization after liver transplantation in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have higher healthcare utilization after liver transplantation (LT), yet objective risk stratification tools in this population are lacking. We evaluated the Liver Frailty Index (LFI) as one potential tool. METHODS: Ambulatory LT candidates ≥65 years without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent LT from 1/2012 to 6/2022 at 8 U.S. centers were included. Estimates of the difference in median using quantile regression were used to assess the adjusted association between LFI and hospitalized days within 90 days post-LT. RESULTS: Of 131 LT recipients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) (1st -3rd quartiles) age was 68 years (66-70); median pre-LT MELD-Na was 19 (15-24). Median LFI was 4.1 (3.6-4.7); 27% were frail (LFI≥4.5). Median hospitalized days within 90 days post-LT was 11 (7-20). Compared with non-frail patients, frail patients were hospitalized for a median of 5 days longer post-LT (95% CI .30-9.7, p = .04). Each .5 unit increase in pre-LT LFI was associated with an increase of 1.16 days (95%CI .42-2.69, p = .02) in hospitalized days post-LT. CONCLUSION: Among older adults undergoing LT, frailty was associated with more hospitalized days within 90 days after LT. The LFI can identify older adults who might benefit from pre-LT or early post-LT programs which may reduce post-LT healthcare utilization, such as early rehabilitation or post-hospital discharge programs.

Patient-centered care: Key elements applicable to chronic liver disease.

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is a progressive illness with high symptom burden and functional and cognitive impairment, often with comorbid mental and substance use disorders. These factors lead to significant deterioration in quality of life, with immense burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare. The current healthcare system in the United States does not adequately meet the needs of patients with CLD or control costs given the episodic, reactive, and fee-for-service structure. There is also a need for clinical and financial accountability for CLD care. In this context, we describe the key elements required to shift the CLD care paradigm to a patient-centered and value-based system built upon the Porter model of value-based health care. The key elements include (1) organization into integrated practice units, (2) measuring and incorporating meaningful patient-reported outcomes, (3) enabling technology to allow innovation, (4) bundled care payments, (5) integrating palliative care within routine care, and (6) formalizing centers of excellence. These elements have been shown to improve outcomes, reduce costs, and improve overall patient experience for other chronic illnesses and should have similar benefits for CLD. Payers need to partner with providers and systems to build upon these elements and help align reimbursements with patients' values and outcomes. The national organizations such as the American Association for Study of Liver Diseases need to guide key stakeholders in standardizing these elements to optimize patient-centered care for CLD.

Association of Frailty With Health-Related Quality of Life in Liver Transplant Recipients.

Importance: Frailty has been recognized as a risk factor for mortality after liver transplant (LT) but little is known of its association with functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQL), termed global functional health, in LT recipients. Objective: To evaluate the association between pre-LT and post-LT frailty with post-LT global functional health. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted at 8 US LT centers and included adults who underwent LT from October 2016 to February 2020. Exposures: Frail was defined by a pre-LT Liver Frailty Index (LFI) score of 4.5 or greater. Main Outcomes and Measures: Global functional health at 1 year after LT, assessed using surveys (Short Form-36 [SF-36; summarized by physical component scores (PFC) and mental component summary scores (MCS)], Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale) and performance-based tests (LFI, Fried Frailty Phenotype, and Short Physical Performance Battery). Results: Of 358 LT recipients (median [IQR] age, 60 [53-65] years; 115 women [32%]; 25 [7%] Asian/Pacific Islander, 21 [6%] Black, 54 [15%] Hispanic White, and 243 [68%] non-Hispanic White individuals), 68 (19%) had frailty pre-LT. At 1 year post-LT, the median (IQR) PCS was lower in recipients who had frailty vs those without frailty pre-LT (42 [31-53] vs 50 [38-56]; P = .002), but the median MCS was similar. In multivariable regression, pre-LT frailty was associated with a -5.3-unit lower post-LT PCS (P < .001), but not MCS. The proportion who had difficulty with 1 or more Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (21% vs 10%) or who were unemployed/receiving disability (38% vs 29%) was higher in recipients with vs without frailty. In a subgroup of 210 recipients with LFI assessments 1 year post-LT, 13% had frailty at 1 year post-LT. Recipients who had frailty post-LT reported lower adjusted SF-36-PCS scores (coefficient, -11.4; P < .001) but not SF-36-MCS scores. Recipients of LT who had frailty vs those without frailty 1 year post-LT also had worse median (IQR) Fried Frailty Phenotype scores (1 [1-2] vs 1 [0-1]) and higher rates of functional impairment by a Short Physical Performance Battery of 9 or less (42% vs 20%; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, pre-LT frailty was associated with worse global functional health 1 year after LT. The presence of frailty after LT was also associated with worse HRQL in physical, but not mental, subdomains. These data suggest that interventions and therapeutics that target frailty that are administered before and/or early post-LT may help to improve the health and well-being of LT recipients.

Frailty, mortality, and health care utilization after liver transplantation: From the Multicenter Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Frailty is a well-established risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), but whether it predicts outcomes among those who have undergone LT is unknown. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult LT recipients from 8 US centers (2012-2019) were included. Pre-LT frailty was assessed in the ambulatory setting using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI). "Frail" was defined by an optimal cut point of LFI ≥ 4.5. We used the 75th percentile to define "prolonged" post-LT length of stay (LOS; ≥12 days), intensive care unit (ICU) days (≥4 days), and inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (≥17 days). Of 1166 LT recipients, 21% were frail pre-LT. Cumulative incidence of death at 1 and 5 years was 6% and 16% for frail and 4% and 10% for nonfrail patients (overall log-rank p = 0.02). Pre-LT frailty was associated with an unadjusted 62% increased risk of post-LT mortality (95% CI, 1.08-2.44); after adjustment for body mass index, HCC, donor age, and donation after cardiac death status, the HR was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.39-3.26). Patients who were frail versus nonfrail experienced a higher adjusted odds of prolonged LT LOS (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.47-2.73), ICU stay (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14), inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.25-2.37), and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.58-3.97). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with nonfrail patients, frail LT recipients had a higher risk of post-LT death and greater post-LT health care utilization, although overall post-LT survival was acceptable. These data lay the foundation to investigate whether targeting pre-LT frailty will improve post-LT outcomes and reduce resource utilization.

Frailty and the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury Among Patients With Cirrhosis.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and frailty are major drivers of outcomes among patients with cirrhosis. What is unknown is the impact of physical frailty on the development of AKI. We included adults with cirrhosis without hepatocellular carcinoma listed for liver transplantation at nine US centers (n = 1,033). Frailty was assessed using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI); "frail" was defined by LFI ≥ 4.2. Chronic kidney disease as a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 . Our primary outcome, AKI, was defined as an increase in serum creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL or a serum creatinine ≥1.5-fold increase. Wait-list mortality was defined as either a death on the wait list or removal for being too sick. We performed Cox regression analyses to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for AKI and wait-list mortality. Of 1,033 participants, 41% were frail and 23% had CKD. Twenty-one percent had an episode of AKI during follow-up. Frail versus nonfrail patients were more likely to develop AKI (25% vs. 19%) and wait-list mortality (21% vs. 13%) (P < 0.01 for each). In multivariable Cox regression, each of the following groups was associated with a higher risk of AKI as compared with not frail/no CKD: frail/no CKD (adjusted HR [aHR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.29-2.72); not frail/CKD (aHR = 4.30, CI = 2.88-6.42); and frail/CKD (aHR = 4.85, CI = 3.33-7.07). We use a readily available metric, LFI, to identify those patients with cirrhosis most at risk for AKI. We highlight that serum creatinine and creatinine-based estimations of glomerular filtration rate may not fully capture a patient's vulnerability to AKI among the frail phenotype. Conclusion: Our work lays the foundation for implementing physical frailty in clinical practice to identify AKI earlier, implement reno-protective strategies, and expedite liver transplantation.

Palliative Care Always: Hepatology-Virtual Primary Palliative Care Training for Hepatologists.

Palliative care (PC) benefits patients with serious illness including end-stage liver disease (ESLD). As part of a cluster randomized trial, hepatologists were trained to deliver primary palliative care to patients with ESLD using an online course, Palliative Care Always: Hepatology (PCA:Hep). Here we present a multimethod formative evaluation (feasibility, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, and practice patterns) of PCA:Hep. Feasibility was measured by completion of coursework and achieving a course grade of >80%. Knowledge acquisition was measured through assessments before and throughout the course. Pre/post-course surveys were conducted to determine self-efficacy and practice patterns. The hepatologists (n = 39) enrolled in a 12-week online course and spent 1-3 hours on the course weekly. The course was determined to be feasible as 97% successfully completed the course and 100% passed. The course was acceptable to participants; 91.7 % reported a positive course experience and satisfaction with knowledge gained (91.6%). The pre/post knowledge assessment showed an improvement of 6.0% (pre 85.9% to post 91.9%, 95% CI [2.8, 9.2], P = 0.001). Self-efficacy increased significantly (P < 0.001) in psychological symptom management, hospice, and psychosocial support. A year after training, over 80% of the hepatologists reported integrating a variety of PC skills into routine patient care. Conclusion: PCA:Hep is feasible, acceptable, and improves learner knowledge and confidence in palliative care skills. This is a viable method to teach primary PC skills to specialists caring for patients with ESLD.

Quality measures in HCC care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The burden of HCC is substantial. To address gaps in HCC care, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) aimed to develop a standard set of process-based measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) along the HCC care continuum. We identified candidate process and outcomes measures for HCC care based on structured literature review. A 13-member panel with content expertise across the HCC care continuum evaluated candidate measures on importance and performance gap using a modified Delphi approach (two rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Candidate PROs based on a structured scoping review were ranked by 74 patients with HCC across 7 diverse institutions. Out of 135 measures, 29 measures made the final set. These covered surveillance (6 measures), diagnosis (6 measures), staging (2 measures), treatment (10 measures), and outcomes (5 measures). Examples included the use of ultrasound (± alpha-fetoprotein [AFP]) every 6 months, need for surveillance in high-risk populations, diagnostic testing for patients with a new AFP elevation, multidisciplinary liver tumor board (MLTB) review of Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System 4 lesions, standard evaluation at diagnosis, treatment recommendations based on Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging, MLTB discussion of treatment options, appropriate referral for evaluation of liver transplantation candidacy, and role of palliative therapy. PROs include those related to pain, anxiety, fear of treatment, and uncertainty about the best individual treatment and the future. The AASLD PMC has developed a set of explicit quality measures in HCC care to help bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and measurable processes and outcomes. Measurement and subsequent implementation of these metrics could be a central step in the improvement of patient care and outcomes in this high-risk population.

Liver Transplantation for T2 Hepatocellular Carcinoma during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Novel Model Balancing Individual Benefit against Healthcare Resources.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused temporary drops in the supply of organs for transplantation, leading to renewed debate about whether T2 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients should receive priority during these times. The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative model to aid decision-making in liver transplantation for T2 HCC. We proposed a novel ethical framework where the individual transplant benefit for a T2 HCC patient should outweigh the harm to others on the waiting list, determining a "net benefit", to define appropriate organ allocation. This ethical framework was then translated into a quantitative Markov model including Italian averages for waiting list characteristics, donor resources, mortality, and transplant rates obtained from a national prospective database (n = 8567 patients). The net benefit of transplantation in a T2 HCC patient in a usual situation varied from 0 life months with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of 15, to 34 life months with a MELD score of 40, while it progressively decreased with acute organ shortage during a pandemic (i.e., with a 50% decrease in organs, the net benefit varied from 0 life months with MELD 30, to 12 life months with MELD 40). Our study supports the continuation of transplantation for T2 HCC patients during crises such as COVID-19; however, the focus needs to be on those T2 HCC patients with the highest net survival benefit.

Bariatric surgery and the risk of alcohol-related cirrhosis and alcohol misuse.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bariatric surgery is common, but alcohol misuse has been reported following these procedures. We aimed to determine if bariatric surgery is associated with increased risk of alcohol-related cirrhosis (AC) and alcohol misuse. METHODS: Retrospective observational analysis of obese adults with employer-sponsored insurance administrative claims from 2008 to 2016. Subjects with diagnosis codes for bariatric surgery were included. Primary outcome was risk of AC. Secondary outcome was risk of alcohol misuse. Bariatric surgery was divided into before 2008 and after 2008 to account for patients who had a procedure during the study period. Cox proportional hazard regression models using age as the time variable were used with interaction analyses for bariatric surgery and gender. RESULTS: A total of 194 130 had surgery from 2008 to 2016 while 209 090 patients had bariatric surgery prior to 2008. Age was 44.1 years, 61% women and enrolment was 3.7 years. A total of 4774 (0.07%) had AC. Overall risk of AC was lower for those who received sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic banding during the study period (HR 0.4, P <.001; HR 0.43, P =.02) and alcohol misuse increased for Roux-en-Y and sleeve gastrectomy recipients (HR 1.86 and 1.35, P <.001, respectively). In those who had surgery before 2008, women had increased risk of AC and alcohol misuse compared to women without bariatric surgery (HR 2.1 [95% CI: 1.79-2.41] for AC; HR 1.98 [95% CI 1.93-2.04]). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is associated with a short-term decreased risk of AC but potential long-term increased risk of AC in women. Post-operative alcohol surveillance is necessary to reduce this risk.

Association of Frailty and Sex With Wait List Mortality in Liver Transplant Candidates in the Multicenter Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study.

Importance: Female liver transplant candidates experience higher rates of wait list mortality than male candidates. Frailty is a critical determinant of mortality in patients with cirrhosis, but how frailty differs between women and men is unknown. Objective: To determine whether frailty is associated with the gap between women and men in mortality among patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study enrolled 1405 adults with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplant without hepatocellular carcinoma seen during 3436 ambulatory clinic visits at 9 US liver transplant centers. Data were collected from January 1, 2012, to October 1, 2019, and analyzed from August 30, 2019, to October 30, 2020. Exposures: At outpatient evaluation, the Liver Frailty Index (LFI) score was calculated (grip strength, chair stands, and balance). Main Outcomes and Measures: The risk of wait list mortality was quantified using Cox proportional hazards regression by frailty. Mediation analysis was used to quantify the contribution of frailty to the gap in wait list mortality between women and men. Results: Of 1405 participants, 578 (41%) were women and 827 (59%) were men (median age, 58 [interquartile range (IQR), 50-63] years). Women and men had similar median scores on the laboratory-based Model for End-stage Liver Disease incorporating sodium levels (MELDNa) (women, 18 [IQR, 14-23]; men, 18 [IQR, 15-22]), but baseline LFI was higher in women (mean [SD], 4.12 [0.85] vs 4.00 [0.82]; P = .005). Women displayed worse balance of less than 30 seconds (145 [25%] vs 149 [18%]; P = .003), worse sex-adjusted grip (mean [SD], -0.31 [1.08] vs -0.16 [1.08] kg; P = .01), and fewer chair stands per second (median, 0.35 [IQR, 0.23-0.46] vs 0.37 [IQR, 0.25-0.49]; P = .04). In unadjusted mixed-effects models, LFI was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.06-0.23) units higher in women than men (P = .001). After adjustment for other variables associated with frailty, LFI was 0.16 (95% CI, 0.08-0.23) units higher in women than men (P < .001). In unadjusted regression, women experienced a 34% (95% CI, 3%-74%) increased risk of wait list mortality than men (P = .03). Sequential covariable adjustment did not alter the association between sex and wait list mortality; however, adjustment for LFI attenuated the mortality gap between women and men. In mediation analysis, an estimated 13.0% (IQR, 0.5%-132.0%) of the gender gap in wait list mortality was mediated by frailty. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings demonstrate that women with cirrhosis display worse frailty scores than men despite similar MELDNa scores. The higher risk of wait list mortality that women experienced appeared to be explained in part by frailty.

Identifying an Optimal Liver Frailty Index Cutoff to Predict Waitlist Mortality in Liver Transplant Candidates.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Frailty, as measured by the Liver Frailty Index (LFI), is associated with liver transplant (LT) waitlist mortality. We sought to identify an optimal LFI cutoff that predicts waitlist mortality. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adults with cirrhosis awaiting LT without hepatocellular carcinoma at nine LT centers in the United States with LFI assessments were included. Multivariable competing risk analysis assessed the relationship between LFI and waitlist mortality. We identified a single LFI cutoff by evaluating the fit of the competing risk models, searching for the cutoff that gave the best model fit (as judged by the pseudo-log-likelihood). We ascertained the area under the curve (AUC) in an analysis of waitlist mortality to find optimal cutoffs at 3, 6, or 12 months. We used the AUC to compare the discriminative ability of LFI+Model for End Stage Liver Disease-sodium (MELDNa) versus MELDNa alone in 3-month waitlist mortality prediction. Of 1,405 patients, 37 (3%), 82 (6%), and 135 (10%) experienced waitlist mortality at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. LFI was predictive of waitlist mortality across a broad LFI range: 3.7-5.2. We identified an optimal LFI cutoff of 4.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0-4.8) for 3-month mortality, 4.2 (95% CI, 4.1-4.4) for 6-month mortality, and 4.2 (95% CI, 4.1-4.4) for 12-month mortality. The AUC for prediction of 3-month mortality for MELDNa was 0.73; the addition of LFI to MELDNa improved the AUC to 0.79. CONCLUSIONS: LFI is predictive of waitlist mortality across a wide spectrum of LFI values. The optimal LFI cutoff for waitlist mortality was 4.4 at 3 months and 4.2 at 6 and 12 months. The discriminative performance of LFI+MELDNa was greater than MELDNa alone. Our data suggest that incorporating LFI with MELDNa can more accurately represent waitlist mortality in LT candidates.

Utility of positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan in detecting residual hepatocellular carcinoma post treatment: Series of case reports.

BACKGROUND: Multi-phase computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been the standard of care for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis for years. CASE SUMMARY: We report a case series of four patients in whom positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scan complemented the conventional CT/MRI scans in evaluating treatment response. In these four cases the conventional multi-phase CT and MRI failed to identify residual HCC disease post-treatment, while PET-CT complemented and aided in treatment response evaluation. In each case, the addition of PET-CT identified and located residual HCC disease, allowed retreatment, and altered medical management. CONCLUSION: This case series suggests that PET-CT should perhaps play a role in the HCC management algorithm, in addition to the conventional contrast-enhanced multi-phase scans.

Safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a technically challenging procedure rarely associated with severe postprocedure complications. Hormonal changes during pregnancy promote cholelithiasis, but there are limited clinical data available on the outcomes of ERCP in pregnant women. ERCP techniques without irradiation were recently introduced as potential alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety of ERCP in pregnancy and to compare outcomes of radiation versus nonradiation ERCP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Medline/Ovid, Web of Science, and Google Scholar through April 18th, 2018 using PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines identified 27 studies reporting the outcomes of ERCP in pregnancy. Random effects pooled event rate and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Heterogeneity was measured by I2, and meta-regression analysis was conducted. Adverse outcomes were divided into fetal, maternal pregnancy-related, and maternal nonpregnancy-related. RESULTS: In all, 27 studies reporting on 1,307 pregnant patients who underwent ERCP were identified. Median age was 27.1 years. All results were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The pooled event rate for overall adverse outcomes was 15.9% (95% CI = 0.132-0.191) in all studies combined, 17.6% (95% CI = 0.109-0.272) in nonradiation ERCP (NR-ERCP) subgroup and 21.6% (95% CI = 0.154-0.294) in radiation ERCP subgroup. There was no significant difference in the pooled event rate for fetal adverse outcomes in NR-ERCP 6.2% (95% CI = 0.027-0.137) versus 5.2% (95% CI = 0.026-0.101) in radiation ERCP group. There was no significant difference in maternal pregnancy-related adverse outcome event rate between NR-ERCP (8.4%) (95% CI = 0.038-0.173) and radiation ERCP (7.1%) (95% CI = 0.039-0.125). Maternal nonpregnancy-related adverse outcome event rate in NR-ERCP was 7.6% (95% CI = 0.038-0.145), which was half the event rate in radiation ERCP group of 14.9% (95% CI = 0.102-0.211). CONCLUSIONS: ERCP done by experienced endoscopists is a safe procedure during pregnancy. Radiation-free techniques appear to reduce the rates of nonpregnancy-related complications, but not of fetal and pregnancy-related complications.

Association Between Liver Transplant Wait-list Mortality and Frailty Based on Body Mass Index.

Importance: Among liver transplant candidates, obesity and frailty are associated with increased risk of death while they are on the wait-list. However, use of body mass index (BMI) may not detect candidates at a higher risk of death owing to the fact that ascites and muscle wasting are seen across transplant candidates of all BMI measurements. Objective: To evaluate whether the association between wait-list mortality and frailty varied by BMI of liver transplant candidates. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort study was conducted at 9 liver transplant centers in the United States from March 1, 2012, to May 1, 2018, among 1108 adult liver transplant candidates without hepatocellular carcinoma. Exposures: At outpatient evaluation, the Liver Frailty Index score was calculated (grip strength, chair stands, and balance), with frailty defined as a Liver Frailty Index score of 4.5 or more. Candidates' BMI was categorized as nonobese (18.5-29.9), class 1 obesity (30.0-34.9), and class 2 or greater obesity (≥35.0). Main Outcomes and Measures: The risk of wait-list mortality was quantified using competing risks regression by candidate frailty, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, Model for End-stage Liver Disease Sodium score, cause of liver disease, and ascites, including an interaction with candidate BMI. Results: Of 1108 liver transplant candidates (474 women and 634 men; mean [SD] age, 55 [10] years), 290 (26.2%) were frail; 170 of 670 nonobese candidates (25.4%), 64 of 246 candidates with class 1 obesity (26.0%), and 56 of 192 candidates with class 2 or greater obesity (29.2%) were frail (P = .57). Frail nonobese candidates and frail candidates with class 1 obesity had a higher risk of wait-list mortality compared with their nonfrail counterparts (nonobese candidates: adjusted subhazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.02-2.33; P = .04; and candidates with class 1 obesity: adjusted subhazard ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.99-2.99; P = .06; P = .75 for interaction). However, frail candidates with class 2 or greater obesity had a 3.19-fold higher adjusted risk of wait-list mortality compared with nonfrail candidates with class 2 or greater obesity (95% CI, 1.75-5.82; P < .001; P = .047 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance: This study's finding suggest that among nonobese liver transplant candidates and candidates with class 1 obesity, frailty was associated with a 2-fold higher risk of wait-list mortality. However, the mortality risk associated with frailty differed for candidates with class 2 or greater obesity, with frail candidates having a more than 3-fold higher risk of wait-list mortality compared with nonfrail patients. Frailty assessments may help to identify vulnerable patients, particularly those with a BMI of 35.0 or more, in whom a clinician's visual evaluation may be less reliable to assess muscle mass and nutritional status.

Introducing Palliative Care within the Treatment of End-Stage Liver Disease: The Study Protocol of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) suffer from myriad symptoms due to the systemic effects of the disease and unpredictable acute episodes, which contribute to progressive deterioration in quality of life (QOL). Despite clear evidence that palliative care (PC) improves QOL in other serious illnesses, PC is underutilized and delayed for ESLD patients. Through a comparative effectiveness trial of specialist led consultative PC (Model 1) versus trained hepatologist led PC (Model 2), we aim to build evidence on introducing PC into the routine outpatient care of ESLD patients. Objective: We hypothesize that trained hepatologist led PC model will have a better improvement in QOL compared to consultative PC model. Methods: This two-arm, multicenter cluster-randomized trial assesses the effectiveness of two PC models for patients with ESLD. Fourteen clinical centers will recruit 1260 patient-caregiver dyads. Each center is the unit of randomization. Hepatologists at sites randomized to the Model 2 have undergone web-based training in the principles of PC as pertained to ESLD. PC intervention is delivered over four visits (initial, one, two, and three months). Follow-up assessments occur at 6, 9, and 12 months. Eligible patients are those with new onset or ongoing complications of ESLD with a caregiver willing to participate. Outcomes: The primary outcome is change in patients' QOL from baseline to three months. Secondary outcomes include symptom burden, depression, distress, satisfaction with care, caregiver burden and QOL, goal concordant care, and health care utilization. Challenges and Contributions Engagement: A research advisory board has been developed with representatives from the participating centers, who have provided active feedback on the protocol, outcomes, study methods, and training program. Intervention Fidelity: Intervention fidelity will be maintained by adherence to a visit agenda and providers in both models completing a PC checklist after each study visit.

Palliative care and end-stage liver disease: a critical review of current knowledge.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with high symptom burden, poor quality of life, and significant healthcare costs. Palliative care, which is not synonymous with hospice or end-of-life care, is a multidisciplinary model of care that focuses on patient-centered goals with the intent of improving quality of life and reducing suffering. This review will summarize current literature supporting the benefits of early integration of palliative care in patients in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: Advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care discussions have been associated with improved quality of life, decreased anxiety, and improved satisfaction with care for both the patient and the caregiver. These discussions are beneficial to all patients with ESLD, including those listed for liver transplantation. SUMMARY: Despite the resounding benefits of palliative care for patients with other advanced diseases, palliative care remains underutilized in liver disease. There is an urgent need for education of hepatology/transplant providers as well as development of society guidelines to help dissemination and acceptability of palliative care for patients with ESLD.

Frailty Associated With Waitlist Mortality Independent of Ascites and Hepatic Encephalopathy in a Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Frailty is associated with mortality in patients with cirrhosis. We measured frailty using 3 simple tests and calculated Liver Frailty Index (LFI) scores for patients at multiple ambulatory centers. We investigated associations between LFI scores, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and mortality. METHODS: Adults without hepatocellular carcinoma who were on the liver transplantation waitlist at 9 centers in the United States (N = 1044) were evaluated using the LFI; LFI scores of at least 4.5 indicated that patients were frail. We performed logistic regression analyses to assess associations between frailty and ascites or HE and competing risk regression analyses (with liver transplantation as the competing risk) to estimate sub-hazard ratios (sHRs) of waitlist mortality (death or removal from the waitlist). RESULTS: Of study subjects, 36% had ascites, 41% had HE, and 25% were frail. The odds of frailty were higher for patients with ascites (adjusted odd ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-2.14) or HE (odd ratio 2.45, 95% CI 1.80-3.33) than for those without these features. Larger proportions of frail patients with ascites (29%) or HE (30%) died while on the waitlist compared with patients who were not frail (17% of patients with ascites and 20% with HE). In univariable analysis, ascites (sHR 1.52, 95% CI 1.14-2.05), HE (sHR 1.84, 95% CI 1.38-2.45), and frailty (sHR 2.38, 95% CI 1.77-3.20) were associated with waitlist mortality. In adjusted models, only frailty remained significantly associated with waitlist mortality (sHR 1.82, 95% CI 1.31-2.52); ascites and HE were not. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is a prevalent complication of cirrhosis that is observed more frequently in patients with ascites or HE and independently associated with waitlist mortality. LFI scores can be used to objectively quantify risk of death related to frailty-in excess of liver disease severity-in patients with cirrhosis.