Long-term outcomes after hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion and transplantation of 1,202 donor livers in a real-world setting (HOPE-REAL study).

BACKGROUND & AIM: We aimed to assess long-term outcome after transplantation of HOPE-treated donor livers based on real-world data (i.e., IDEAL-D stage 4). METHODS: In this international, multicentre, observational cohort study, we collected data from adult recipients of a HOPE-treated liver transplanted between January 2012 and December 2021. Analyses were stratified for brain-dead (DBD) and circulatory-dead (DCD) donor livers, sub-divided by their respective risk categories. The primary outcome was death-censored graft survival. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of primary non-function (PNF) and ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). RESULTS: We report on 1202 liver transplantations (64% DBD) performed at 22 European centres. For DBD, a total number of 99 benchmark (8%), 176 standard (15%), and 493 extended-criteria (41%) cases were included. For DCD, 117 transplants were classified as low-risk (10%), 186 as high-risk (16%), and 131 as futile (11%), with significant risk profile variations among centres. Actuarial 1-, 3-, and 5-year death-censored graft survival for DBD and DCD was 95%, 92%, and 91%, vs. 92%, 87%, and 81%, respectively (logrank p=0.003). Within DBD and DCD-strata, death-censored graft survival was similar among risk groups (logrank p=0.26, p=0.99). Graft loss due to PNF or IC was 2.3% and 0.4% (DBD), and 5% and 4.1% (DCD). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows excellent 5-year survival after transplantation of HOPE-treated DBD and DCD livers with low rates of graft loss due to PNF or IC, irrespective of their individual risk profile. HOPE-treatment has now reached IDEAL-D stage 4, which further supports the implementation of HOPE in routine clinical practice. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates the excellent long-term performance of HOPE-treatment of DCD and DBD liver grafts irrespective of their individual risk profile in a real-world setting, outside the evaluation of randomized controlled trials. While previous studies have established safety, feasibility, and efficacy against the current standard, according to the IDEAL-D evaluation framework, HOPE-treatment has now reached the final IDEAL-D Stage 4, which further supports the implementation of HOPE in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05520320.

Recipient hepatectomy technique may affect oncological outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

To date, caval sparing (CS) and total caval replacement (TCR) for recipient hepatectomy in liver transplantation (LT) have been compared only in terms of surgical morbidity. Nonetheless, the CS technique is inherently associated with an increased manipulation of the native liver and later exclusion of the venous outflow, which may increase the risk of intraoperative shedding of tumor cells when LT is performed for HCC. A multicenter, retrospective study was performed to assess the impact of recipient hepatectomy (CS vs. TCR) on the risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence among 16 European transplant centers that used either TCR or CS recipient hepatectomy as an elective protocol technique. Exclusion criteria comprised cases of non-center-protocol recipient hepatectomy technique, living-donor LT, HCC diagnosis suspected on preoperative imaging but not confirmed at the pathological examination of the explanted liver, HCC in close contact with the IVC, and previous liver resection for HCC. In 2420 patients, CS and TCR approaches were used in 1452 (60%) and 968 (40%) cases, respectively. Group adjustment with inverse probability weighting was performed for high-volume center, recipient age, alcohol abuse, viral hepatitis, Child-Pugh class C, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, cold ischemia time, clinical HCC stage within Milan criteria, pre-LT downstaging/bridging therapies, pre-LT alphafetoprotein serum levels, number and size of tumor nodules, microvascular invasion, and complete necrosis of all tumor nodules (matched cohort, TCR, n = 938; CS, n = 935). In a multivariate cause-specific hazard model, CS was associated with a higher risk of HCC recurrence (HR: 1.536, p = 0.007). In conclusion, TCR recipient hepatectomy, compared to the CS approach, may be associated with some protective effect against post-LT tumor recurrence.

Combined transarterial chemoembolization and thermal ablation in candidates to liver transplantation with hepatocellular carcinoma: pathological findings and post-transplant outcome.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluating the pathological response and the survival outcomes of combined thermal ablation (TA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) as a bridge or downstaging for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) > 3 cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review encompassed 36 consecutive patients who underwent combined TA-TACE as bridging or downstaging before LT. Primary objectives included necrosis of the target lesion at explant pathology, post-LT overall survival (OS) and post-LT recurrence-free survival (RFS). For OS and RFS, a comparison with 170 patients subjected to TA alone for nodules <3 cm in size was also made. RESULTS: Out of the 36 patients, 63.9% underwent TA-TACE as bridging, while 36.1% required downstaging. The average node size was 4.25 cm. All cases were discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board to assess the best treatment for each patient. Half received radiofrequency (RF), and the other half underwent microwave (MW). All nodes underwent drug-eluting beads (DEB) TACE with epirubicin. The mean necrosis percentage was 65.9% in the RF+TACE group and 83.3% in the MW+TACE group (p-value = 0.099). OS was 100% at 1 year, 100% at 3 years and 94.7% at 5 years. RFS was 97.2% at 1 year, 94.4% at 3 years and 90% at 5 years. Despite the different sizes of the lesions, OS and RFS did not show significant differences with the cohort of patients subjected to TA alone. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the effectiveness of combined TA-TACE for HCC>3 cm, particularly for bridging and downstaging to LT, achieving OS and RFS rates significantly exceeding 80% at 1, 3 and 5 years.

Liver transplantation for tumor entities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Tumor entities represent an increasing indication for liver transplantation (LT). This review addresses the most contentious indications of LT in transplant oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: Patient selection based on tumor biology in LT for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) demonstrated promising long-term outcomes and preserved quality of life despite high recurrence rates. In selected cases, LT for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is feasible, with acceptable survival even in high-burden cases responsive to chemotherapy. LT following a strict neoadjuvant protocol for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) resulted in long-term outcomes consistently surpassing benchmark values, and potentially outperforming liver resection. SUMMARY: While preliminary results are promising, prospective trials are crucial to define applications in routine clinical practice. Molecular profiling and targeted therapies pave the way for personalized approaches, requiring evolving allocation systems for equitable LT access.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Era of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains the leading oncological indication for liver transplantation (LT), with evolving and broadened inclusion criteria. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) gained a central role in systemic HCC treatment and showed potential in the peri-transplant setting as downstaging/bridging therapy before LT or as a treatment for HCC recurrence following LT. However, the antagonistic mechanisms of action between ICIs and immunosuppressive drugs pose significant challenges, particularly regarding the risk of acute rejection (AR). This review analyzes the main signaling pathways targeted by ICI therapies and summarizes current studies on ICI therapy before and after LT. The literature on this topic is limited and highly heterogeneous, precluding definitive evidence-based conclusions. The use of ICIs before LT appears promising, provided that a sufficient wash-out period is implemented. In contrast, the results of post-LT ICI therapy do not support its wide clinical application due to high AR rates and overall poor response to treatment. In the future, modern graft preservation techniques might support the selection of good ICI responders, but data from high-level studies are urgently needed.