Location and allocation: Inequity of access to liver transplantation for patients with severe acute-on-chronic liver failure in Europe.

There is growing evidence that liver transplantation (LT) is the most effective treatment for acute-on-chronic liver failure grade-3 (ACLF-3). This study examines whether and how this evidence translates into practice by analyzing the variability in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, listing strategies, and LT activity for patients with ACLF-3 across transplantation centers in Europe. Consecutive patients who were admitted to the ICU with ACLF-3, whether or not they were listed and/or transplanted with ACLF-3, between 2018 and 2019 were included across 20 transplantation centers. A total of 351 patients with ACLF-3 were included: 33 had been listed prior to developing ACLF-3 and 318 had not been listed at the time of admission to the ICU. There was no correlation between the number of unlisted patients with ACLF-3 admitted to the ICU and the number listed or transplanted while in ACLF-3 across centers. By contrast, there was a correlation between the number of patients listed and the number transplanted while in ACLF-3. About 21% of patients who were listed while in ACLF-3 died on the waiting list or were delisted. The percentage of LT for patients with ACLF-3 varied from 0% to 29% for those transplanted with decompensated cirrhosis across centers (average = 8%), with an I2 index of 68% (95% confidence interval, 49%-80%), showing substantial heterogeneity among centers. The 1-year survival for all patients with ACLF-3 was significantly higher in centers that listed and transplanted more patients with ACLF-3 (>10 patients) than in centers that listed and transplanted fewer: 36% versus 20%, respectively (p = 0.012). Patients with ACLF-3 face inequity of access to LT across Europe. Waitlisting strategies for patients with ACLF-3 influence their access to LT and, ultimately, their survival.

Kidney Transplants From Donors on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Prior to Death Are Associated With Better Long-Term Renal Function Compared to Donors After Circulatory Death.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) allows expansion of the donor pool. We report on 11 years of Italian experience by comparing the outcome of grafts from DCD and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) prior to death donation (EPD), a new donor category. We studied 58 kidney recipients from DCD or EPD and collected donor/recipient clinical characteristics. Primary non function (PNF) and delayed graft function (DGF) rates, dialysis need, hospitalization duration, and patient and graft survival rates were compared. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was measured throughout the follow-up. Better clinical outcomes were achieved with EPD than with DCD despite similar graft and patient survival rates The total warm ischemia time (WIT) was longer in the DCD group than in the EPD group. Pure WIT was the highest in the class II group. The DGF rate was higher in the DCD group than in the EPD group. PNF rate was similar in the groups. Dialysis need was the greatest and hospitalization the longest in the class II DCD group. eGFR was lower in the class II DCD group than in the EPD group. Our results indicate good clinical outcomes of kidney transplants from DCD despite the long "no-touch period" and show that ECMO in the procurement phase improves graft outcome, suggesting EPD as a source for pool expansion.

Does the Pringle maneuver affect survival and recurrence following surgical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma? A western series of 441 patients.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the Pringle maneuver (PM) on long-term outcome after curative resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, with eastern series reporting conflicting results. We aim to evaluate the impact of the PM in a western cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with HCC who underwent liver resection between January 2001 and August 2015. Patients were divided in two groups based the use of the PM during resection. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: A total of 441 patients were analyzed. Of these, 176 patients (39.9%) underwent PM. Median OS was 46.4 months (95%CI: 34.1-58.7) for the PM group and 56.5 months (95%CI: 37.1-75.9) for the no-PM group (P = 0.188), with a median DFS of 26.7 months (95%CI: 15.7-37.7) and 24.9 months (95%CI: 18.1-31.7), respectively (P = 0.883). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that PM does not increase the risk of tumor recurrence or decrease long-term survival.

Donor safety in living donor liver donation: An Italian multicenter survey.

Major concerns about donor morbidity and mortality still limit the use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to overcome the organ shortage. The present study assessed donor safety in LDLT in Italy reporting donor postoperative outcomes in 246 living donation procedures performed by 7 transplant centers. Outcomes were evaluated over 2 time periods using the validated Clavien 5-tier grading system, and several clinical variables were analyzed to determine the risk factors for donor morbidity. Different grafts were obtained from the 246 donor procedures (220 right lobe, 10 left lobe, and 16 left lateral segments). The median follow-up after donation was 112 months. There was no donor mortality. One or more complications occurred in 82 (33.3%) donors, and 3 of them had intraoperative complications (1.2%). Regardless of graft type, the rate of major complications (grade ≥ 3) was 12.6% (31/246). The overall donor morbidity and the rate of major complications did not differ significantly over time: 26 (10.6%) donors required hospital readmission throughout the follow-up period, whereas 5 (2.0%) donors required reoperation. Prolonged operative time (>400 minutes), intraoperative hypotension (systolic < 100 mm Hg), vascular abnormalities, and intraoperative blood loss (>300 mL) were multivariate risk factors for postoperative donor complications. In conclusion, from the standpoint of living donor surgery, a meticulous and well-standardized technique that reduces operative time and prevents blood loss and intraoperative hypotension may reduce the incidence of donor complications. Transparency in reporting results after LDLT is mandatory, and we should continue to strive for zero donor mortality. Liver Transplantation 23 184-193 2017 AASLD.

Are there any relations among transplant centre volume, surgical technique and anatomy for donor graft selection? Ten-year multicentric Italian experience on mini-invasive living donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Selection of the right or left living donor kidney for transplantation is influenced by many variables. In the present multi centric study including 21 Italian transplant centres, we evaluated whether centre volume or surgical technique may influence the selection process. METHODS: Intra- and perioperative donor data, donor kidney function, and recipient and graft survival were collected among 693 mini-invasive living donor nephrectomies performed from 2002 to 2014. Centre volume (LOW, 1-50 cases; HIGH, >50 cases) and surgical technique (FULL-LAP, full laparoscopic and robotic; HA-LAP, hand-assisted laparoscopy; MINI-OPEN, mini-lumbotomy) were correlated with selection of right or left donor kidney and with donor and recipient outcome. RESULTS: HIGH-volume centres retrieved a higher rate of donor right kidneys (29.3% versus 17.6%, P < 0.01) with single artery (83.1% versus 76.4%, P < 0.05) compared with LOW-volume centres. Surgical technique correlated significantly with rate of donor right kidney and presence of multiple arteries: MINI-OPEN (53% and 13%) versus HA-LAP (29% and 22%) versus FULL-LAP (11% and 23%), P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively. All donors had an uneventful outcome; donor bleeding was more frequent in LOW-volume centres (4% versus 0.9%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Centre volume and surgical technique influenced donor kidney side selection. Donor nephrectomy in LOW-volume centres was associated with higher risk of donor bleeding.

Survival after Liver Transplant: Influence of Progression of Disease and of Restoration of the "Milan" Criteria in Patients with Hepato-cellular Carcinoma undergoing Down-staging Procedures.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Selection of patients with hepa- to-cellular carcinoma for liver transplantation is gen- erally performed according to the so-called Milan cri- teria. The aim of this study was to learn whether, after down-staging loco-regional therapies, patients origi- nally non-fulfilling the MC (Milan-OUT) meet these criteria (Milan-IN). METHODOLOGY: Between January 2000 and December 2008, 172 patients with HCC re- ceived LT at our Department. Of these, 142 were sub- jected to DS before LT. RESULTS: Of the 142 patients who received DS, 115 (81%) were Milan-IN and 27 (19%) were Milan-OUT at the time of their enrollment in the waiting list for LT. After a median follow-up of 50 months, overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival and dis- ease recurrence-free survival were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Milan-OUT HCC can be successfully subjected to LT when they fulfill the MC after being subjected to DS. Imaging progres- sion while on the waiting list is a strong predictor of high rates of HCC recurrence even in patients meet- ing the MC. Lack of imaging progression seems to be a strong predictor of positive LT outcome and should be added to the eligibility criteria for the assessment of LT candidates with HCC.

Residual right portal branch flow after first-step ALPPS: artifact or homeostatic response?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Mutual interactions between portal vein and hepatic artery can be documented during hepatobiliary surgery. Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy (ALPPS) is a recently introduced surgical technique which can also represent a unique living human model to investigate intrahepatic blood circulation. We report three consecutive cases in which a residual right portal branch flow was clearly detectable after first-step ALPPS, and try to further investigate this unexpected finding with intraoperative clamping tests. METHODOLOGY: Every patient was evaluated with CT scan 7 days after first-step ALPPS and Intraoperative Doppler Ultrasonography (IOUS) at both steps of the procedure. RESULTS: In every patient, CT scan and second-step IOUS demonstrated a clear hepatopetal flow distally to the divided right portal branch. The flow was present after right biliary duct clamping and stopped after right total hilar clamping as well as after right hepatic artery occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Neither cross-portal circulation between the two hemilivers nor trans-sinusoidal backflow from the hepatic veins can explain these findings, which are rather consistent with a refilling of the occluded portal branch through the opening of intrahepatic arterioportal shunts (APS). APS could represent the simplest homeostatic mechanism that regulate intrahepatic blood flow.

Pancreatoduodenectomy: Risk Factors of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of the present study is the analysis of risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and of clinical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in a retrospective multicentric review of the patient cohort. METHODOLOGY: From January 2003 to July 2013 143 patients underwent PD: 138 cases were included and 3 groups were identified according to the different types of anastomosis: Group 1 invaginating end-to-end pancreatojejunostomy, Group 2 end-to-side pancreatojejunostomy with duct-to-mucosa anastomosis, Group 3 end-to-side pancreatogastrostomy. RESULTS: Twenty-one % of patients developed POPF, 16% in Group 1, 27% in Group 2, 12% in Group 3. Forty % grade A, 13% grade B and 47% grade C total POPF. It results that POPF occurred in 16% of hard and in 40% of soft pancreatic texture; in 11.4% of dilated Wirsung versus 30.8% of non dilated (p = 0.007). Overall actuarial 1 and 3 year survival after PD is 69% and 48% respectively. Perioperative mortality is 5.8% overall, 17.85% for grade C. CONCLUSIONS: No differences have been found among surgical anastomosis techniques. Soft tissues seem to increase, while dilated Wirsung seems to decrease POPF rate. The development of POPF increase morbidity but it doesn't affect overall survival, more strictly related to tumour histopathology.

Major liver resections, perioperative issues and posthepatectomy liver failure: A comprehensive update for the anesthesiologist.

Significant advances in surgical techniques and relevant medium- and long-term outcomes over the past two decades have led to a substantial expansion in the indications for major liver resections. To support these outstanding results and to reduce perioperative complications, anesthesiologists must address and master key perioperative issues (preoperative assessment, proactive intraoperative anesthesia strategies, and implementation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery approach). Intensive care unit monitoring immediately following liver surgery remains a subject of active and often unresolved debate. Among postoperative complications, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) occurs in different grades of severity (A-C) and frequency (9%-30%), and it is the main cause of 90-d postoperative mortality. PHLF, recently redefined with pragmatic clinical criteria and perioperative scores, can be predicted, prevented, or anticipated. This review highlights: (1) The systemic consequences of surgical manipulations anesthesiologists must respond to or prevent, to positively impact PHLF (a proactive approach); and (2) the maximal intensive treatment of PHLF, including artificial options, mainly based, so far, on Acute Liver Failure treatment(s), to buy time waiting for the recovery of the native liver or, when appropriate and in very selected cases, toward liver transplant. Such a clinical context requires a strong commitment to surgeons, anesthesiologists, and intensivists to work together, for a fruitful collaboration in a mandatory clinical continuum.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver resection: why deny this chance of cure?

INTRODUCTION: Liver transplantation (LT) after liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence may be associated with poor patient long-term results and higher perioperative patient morbidity and mortality. This study focused on short-term and long-term outcomes of LT recipients due to HCC recurrence after LR in a single-institution cohort, and in highly comparable case-matched subgroups. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2009, 570 consecutive patients with documented HCC underwent LR (n=355, 62.2%) or LT (n=215, 37.8%) at our Institute. The case-matched analysis was between 2 groups: group A1, LT recipients who had already undergone LR (n=26); group B1, LT recipients who had not already undergone LR (n=26). RESULTS: Patient morbidity was higher in the A1 group in terms of packed red blood cell units transfused, fresh frozen plasma units transfused, median operative time, postoperative bleeding, and postoperative reoperations. No differences were detected in terms of patient mortality, patient survival, and patient recurrence-free survival at the univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although LT among patients who have already undergone LR is associated with higher risk of patient morbidity, patient long-term survival and recurrence-free survival is not impaired. Therefore, there do not seem to be any valid reasons to deny the chance of LT to patients who have already undergone LR.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Retrospective Bicentric Comparison of Learning Curves and Surgical Outcomes From 2 High-volume European Centers.

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) represents the gold-standard technique for kidney living donation, robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) settled as another appealing minimally invasive technique over the past decades. A comparison between LDN and RDN outcomes was performed. METHODS: RDN and LDN outcomes were compared, focusing on operative time and perioperative risk factors affecting surgery duration. Learning curves for both techniques were compared through spline regression and cumulative sum models. RESULTS: The study analyzed 512 procedures (154 RDN and 358 LDN procedures) performed between 2010 and 2021 in 2 different high-volume transplant centers. The RDN group presented a higher prevalence of arterial variations (36.2 versus 22.4%; P = 0.001) compared with the LDN cohort. No open conversions occurred; operative time (210 versus 195 min; P = 0.011) and warm ischemia time (WIT; 230 versus 180 s; P < 0.001) were longer in RDN. Postoperative complication rate was similar (8.4% versus 11.5%; P = 0.49); the RDN group showed shorter hospital stay (4 versus 5 d; P < 0.001). Spline regression models depicted a faster learning curve in the RDN group ( P = 0.0002). Accordingly, cumulative sum analysis highlighted a turning point after about 50 procedures among the RDN cohort and after about 100 procedures among the LDN group.Higher body mass index resulted as an independent risk factor for longer operative time for both techniques; multiple arteries significantly prolonged operative time in LDN, whereas RDN was longer in right kidney procurements; both procedures were equally shortened by growing surgical experience. CONCLUSIONS: RDN grants a faster learning curve and improves multiple vessel handling. Incidence of postoperative complications was low for both techniques.

Beyond the Milan criteria: what risks for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma progression before liver transplantation?

BACKGROUND: To date the selection of the best candidates for liver transplantation (LT) owing to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been mainly based on tumor morphological characteristics (nodule diameter and number), which have resulted to be independent risk factors for short long-term survival and a high rate of tumor recurrence. METHODS: The study cohort included 118 patients among the 166 with HCC transplanted at our unit from January 2000 to December 2007. Patients were classified according to response to locoregional treatments before LT: progressive Group A; complete Group B; partial Group C; stable Group D. RESULTS: The 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates were 65.5% and 48.9% for Group A versus 84.8% and 74.6% for Group BCD (P = 0.01). The 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 74% and 74% for Group A and 95.7% and 93% for Group BCD (P = 0.007). HCC progression was the only independent risk factor according to Cox regression P = 0.014--odds ratio 4.4 (1.35-14.3). CONCLUSION: After aggressive HCC treatment before LT, imaging progression while on the waiting list was a strong predictor of high HCC recurrence rate also in patients who met the Milan criteria. Lack of imaging progression can contribute toward the selection of good transplant candidates for HCC together with the Milan criteria.

Laparoscopic versus open liver surgery: a single center analysis of post-operative in-hospital and post-discharge results.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is established as a safe and feasible surgical procedure for benign and malignant liver lesions showing many benefits in terms of short-term post-operative outcomes. Nevertheless, it remains unclear if these benefits extend beyond the hospital stay. The aim of this study was to compare in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes between two groups of patients who have undergone either laparoscopic or open hepatectomy (OH). METHODS: Forty-six patients who have undergone LH from September 2008 to September 2011 were compared to 46 matched-pair control patients who have undergone OH. The two groups were compared in terms of in-hospital and 6-month outcomes. Post-discharge outcomes were analyzed in terms of the number of outpatient clinic appointments (OCAs) and readmissions (RAs). Analyses were performed excluding and including conversion cases. RESULTS: The two groups resulted in homogeneous patients' and lesions' characteristics. Patients who underwent LH showed statistically lower intra-operative blood loss, less total and major morbidity and shorter hospital stay. Regarding post-discharge outcomes, significantly less patients of LH group compared to patients of OH group required more than two post-discharge OCAs (in the intention to treat analysis, 28.3 versus 63%, respectively; P = 0.006) or RA (4.3 versus 15.2%, respectively; P = 0.008). The benefits of LH appeared to be maximized in cirrhotic patients; those represented the large part of patients readmitted after hepatectomy regardless of the type of surgical approach (77.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Advantages related to LH extend over the post-discharge period suggesting potential better patient's satisfaction and lower hospital cost.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the impact of neo-adjuvant treatments on the long term results.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: LDLT may represent a valid therapeutic option allowing several advantages for patients affected by HCC and waiting for liver transplantation (LT). However, some reports show a worse long term survival and disease free survival among patients treated by LDLT for HCC than deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients. METHODOLOGY: Among 1145 LT patients, 63 received LDLT. From January 2000 to December 2008, 179 patients underwent LT due to HCC, 30 (16.7%) received LDLT and 154 (86.0%) received DDLT. Patients were selected based on the Milan criteria. TACE, radiofrequency ablation, percutaneous alcoholization, or liver resection were applied as downstaging procedures, while on the waiting list. RESULTS: Overall 3- and 5-year survival rate was 77.3% and 68.7% vs. 82.8% and 76.7%, respectively for LDLT and DDLT recipient with not significant differences. Moreover, 3- and 5- years of recurrence free survival rate was 95.5% (LDLT) vs. 90.5% and 89.4% (DDLT) and resulted not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: LDLT guarantees same long term results than DDLT if the selection criteria of candidates are analogues. Milan criteria remains a valid candidate selection tool to obtain optimal long term results in LDLT. An aggressive downstaging policy seems to improve the long-term results in LDLT, thus LRT may be considered useful to prevent tumor progression waiting for transplantation as well as a neoadjuvant therapy for HCC. A literature detailed meta-analysis could definitely clarify if LDLT is an independent risk factor for HCC recurrence.

Obstructive Uropathy Due to an Unusual Inguinal Hernia 35 Years After Kidney Transplant.

In a kidney transplant recipient, bladder and graft ureter displacement into a groin hernia is a highly unusual cause of obstructive uropathy that may lead to graft dysfunction or graft loss. We report the case of a White man, 56 years old, who had previously, at the age of 19 years, undergone a kidney transplant from a deceased donor, to mitigate chronic glomerulonephritis. The patient presented to us with a reducible left inguinal hernia with worsening kidney function, and we used the Lichtenstein hernioplasty technique to surgically repair the hernia, which was followed by an uneventful postoperative course. Existing literature has identified few cases of kidney graft dysfunction due to inguinal hernias. Groin hernia repair of this type in this specific circumstance remains a subject of debate. However, in our opinion, with attention to appropriate reductions of immunosuppressive therapy, the Lichtenstein technique is safe for transplant recipients and the use of mesh greatly reduces the risk of hernia recurrence.

Minimally invasive sequential treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases by laparoscopic colectomy and robotic right hepatectomy.

PURPOSE: The ideal timing for patients with colorectal cancer to undergo surgery for resectable synchronous liver metastases remains under debate. We describe a new sequential approach using laparoscopic/robotic surgery for the treatment of synchronous liver metastases. METHODS: A 73-year-old man presented with sigmoid cancer and a single 8-cm right liver metastasis. A staged sequential minimally invasive approach was planned. A laparoscopic left colectomy was performed first, followed by a robotic right hepatectomy 10 days later. RESULTS: The left colectomy lasted 120 min with a negligible blood loss (<10 mL). The right hepatectomy was completed robotically with an operating time of 330 min and intraoperative blood loss of 300 mL. The postoperative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged at postoperative day 8 of the liver resection. Three weeks later, the patient received adjuvant chemotherapy. At 26-months follow up, the patient was alive without recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This report suggests the technical feasibility and safety of a sequential totally minimally invasive approach for synchronous colorectal liver metastases. In selected patients, this approach can avoid the risk of a synchronous associate major liver/colonic resection using the advantages of minimally invasive surgery.

Biliary complications after liver transplantation--523 consecutive cases in two centers.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite various surgical techniques, biliary tract complications (BC) remain a major source of morbidity after liver transplantation (LT). METHODOLOGY: Between April 2000 and November 2008, 523 LTs in 487 recipients (36 re transplantations) were performed as follows: 402 whole deceased donor graft LTs, and 121 partial liver transplantation: 75 living donor liver transplantation, 42 split liver transplantation, and 4 reduced size liver transplantation. RESULTS: Mean follow-up period was 935 days (range 1-3174), 1, 3 and 5-year survival rates were 78.7% 74.2% and 74.2%, respectively. One hundred twenty seven patients--from 487 (26%), developed (after 135 LT) 150 singular BC (in total were 181 BC). Sixty four (of 85) bile leaks (75.29%) were early BC, while 53 (of 63) stenosis (84.1%) were late BC. BC does not influenced significantly patients and graft survival (p > 0.6). From 102 deaths, 8 were due to BC (1.6%) and in only 14 (2.67%) graft loss of 523 LT BC had the main role. Multiple ducts, multiple biliary anastomosis and RYHJ determine BC if compared to a single duct graft. Moreover, ductoplasty, graft type and HAT were independent risk factors. CONCLUSION: Biliary complications are common after LT but are rarely an isolated cause of death.

Preoperative risk score for prediction of long-term outcomes after hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Report of a collaborative, international-based, external validation study.

PURPOSE: A preoperative risk score (PRS) to predict outcome of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated by liver surgery could be clinically relevant.To assess accuracy for broadly adoption, external validation of predictive models on independent datasets is crucial. The objective of this study was to externally validate the score for prediction of long-term outcomes after liver surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma proposed by Sasaki et al. and based on preoperative albumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocytes-ratio, CA19-9 and tumor size. METHODS: Patients treated by liver surgery for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma at 11 international HPB centers from 2001 to 2018 were included in the external validation cohort. Harrell's c-index and Hosmer-Lemeshow analyses were used to test PRS discrimination and calibration. Kaplan-Meier curve for risk groups as described in the original study were displayed. RESULTS: A total of 355 patients with 174 deaths during the follow-up period (median = 41.7 months, IQR 32.8-50.6) were included. The median PRS value was 14.7 (IQR 10.7-20.6), with normal distribution across the cohort. A Cox regression on PRS covariates found coefficients similar to those of the derivation cohort, except for tumor size. Measures of discrimination estimated by Harrell's c-index was 0.61(95%CI:0.56-0.67) and Hosmer-Lemeshow p = 0.175. The Kaplan-Meyer estimation showed reasonable discrimination across risk groups, with 5years survival rate ranging from 20.1% to 0%. CONCLUSION: In this external validation cohort, the PRS had mild discrimination and poor calibration performance, similarly to the original publication. Nevertheless, its ability to identify different classes of risk is clinically useful, for a better tailoring of a therapeutic strategy.

Should we still offer split-liver transplantation for two adult recipients? A retrospective study of our experience.

The role of split-liver transplantation (SLT) for two adult recipients is still a matter of debate, and no agreement exists on indications, surgical techniques, and results. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze the outcome of our series of SLT. From May 1999 to December 2006, 16 patients underwent SLT at our unit. We used 9 full right grafts (segments 5-8) and 7 full left grafts (segments 1-4). The splitting procedure was always carried out in situ with a fully perfused liver. Postoperative complications were recorded in 8 (50%) patients: 5 (55%) in full right grafts and 3 (43%) in full left grafts. No one was retransplanted. After a median follow-up of 55.82 months (range, 0.4-91.2), 5 (31%) patients died, and the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rate for patients and grafts was 69%. We considered as a control group for the global outcome 232 whole liver transplantations performed at our unit in the same period of time. Postoperative complications were recorded in 53 (23%) patients, and after a median follow-up of 57.37 months (mean, 55.11; range, 1-102.83), the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall patient survival was 87%, 82%, and 80%, respectively. In conclusion, SLT for two adult recipients is a technically demanding procedure that requires complex logistics and surgical teams experienced in both liver resection and transplantation. Although the reported rate of survival might be adequate for such a procedure, more efforts have to be made to improve the short-term outcome, which is inadequate in our opinion. The true feasibility of SLT for two adults has to be considered as still under investigation.