Pursuing living donor liver transplantation improves outcomes of patients with autoimmune liver diseases: An intention-to-treat analysis.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers the opportunity to decrease waitlist time and mortality for patients with autoimmune liver disease (AILD), autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, and primary sclerosing cholangitis. We compared the survival of patients with a potential living donor (pLDLT) on the waitlist versus no potential living donor (pDDLT) on an intention-to-treat basis. Our retrospective cohort study investigated adults with AILD listed for a liver transplant in our program between 2000 and 2021. The pLDLT group comprised recipients with a potential living donor. Otherwise, they were included in the pDDLT group. Intention-to-treat survival was assessed from the time of listing. Of the 533 patients included, 244 (43.8%) had a potential living donor. Waitlist dropout was higher for the pDDLT groups among all AILDs (pDDLT 85 [29.4%] vs. pLDLT 9 [3.7%], p < 0.001). The 1-, 3, and 5-year intention-to-treat survival rates were higher for pLDLT versus pDDLT among all AILDs (95.7% vs. 78.1%, 89.0% vs. 70.1%, and 87.1% vs. 65.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, pLDLT was associated with a 38% reduction in the risk of death among the AILD cohort (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42-0.93 [ p <0.05]), and 60% among the primary sclerosing cholangitis cohort (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74 [ p <0.05]). There were no differences in the 1-, 3, and 5-year post-transplant survival between LDLT and DDLT (AILD: 95.6% vs. 92.1%, 89.9% vs. 89.4%, and 89.1% vs. 87.1%, p =0.41). This was consistent after adjusting for covariates (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.56-1.68 [ p >0.9]). Our study suggests that having a potential living donor could decrease the risk of death in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis on the waitlist. Importantly, the post-transplant outcomes in this population are similar between the LDLT and DDLT groups.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within and Outside Traditional Selection Criteria: A Multicentric North American Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients post-living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) within and outside standard transplantation selection criteria and the added value of the incorporation of the New York-California (NYCA) score. BACKGROUND: LDLT offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplantation waitlist, reduce waitlist mortality, and expand selection criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Primary adult LDLT recipients between October 1999 and August 2019 were identified from a multicenter cohort of 12 North American centers. Posttransplantation and recurrence-free survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty LDLTs were identified. Patients within Milan criteria (MC) at transplantation had a 1, 5, and 10-year posttransplantation survival of 90.9%, 78.5%, and 64.1% versus outside MC 90.4%, 68.6%, and 57.7% ( P = 0.20), respectively. For patients within the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, respective posttransplantation survival was 90.6%, 77.8%, and 65.0%, versus outside UCSF 92.1%, 63.8%, and 45.8% ( P = 0.08). Fifty-three (83%) patients classified as outside MC at transplantation would have been classified as either low or acceptable risk with the NYCA score. These patients had a 5-year overall survival of 72.2%. Similarly, 28(80%) patients classified as outside UCSF at transplantation would have been classified as a low or acceptable risk with a 5-year overall survival of 65.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival is excellent for patients with HCC undergoing LDLT within and outside selection criteria, exceeding the minimum recommended 5-year rate of 60% proposed by consensus guidelines. The NYCA categorization offers insight into identifying a substantial proportion of patients with HCC outside the MC and the UCSF criteria who still achieve similar post-LDLT outcomes as patients within the criteria.

Performance evaluation of a North American center using the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resections: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The global benchmark cut-offs were set for laparoscopic liver resection procedures: left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy. We aimed to compare the performance of our North American center with the established global benchmarks. METHODS: This is a single-center study of adults who underwent laparoscopic liver resection between 2010 to 2022 at the Toronto General Hospital. Fourteen benchmarking outcomes were assessed: operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, estimated blood loss, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood loss ≥1000mL, open-conversion, postoperative length of stay, return to operation, postoperative morbidity, postoperative major-morbidity, 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, R1 resection, and failure to rescue. Low-risk benchmark cases were defined as follows: patients aged 18 to 70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist score ≤ 2, tumor size <10 cm, and Child-Pugh score ≤A. Cases involving bilio-enteric anastomosis, hilar dissection, or concomitant major procedures were excluded from the low-risk category. Cases that did not meet the criteria for low-risk selection were considered high-risk cases. RESULTS: A total of 178 laparoscopic liver resection cases were analyzed (109 left lateral sectionectomies, 45 left hepatectomies, 24 right hepatectomies). Forty-four (25%) cases qualified as low-risk cases (23 left lateral sectionectomies, 16 left hepatectomies, 5 right hepatectomies). The postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality after left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy for the low-risk cases were 0%, 0%, and 0%, and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases post-2017, the outcomes in the same order were 0%, 0%, and 12%; 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases operated pre2017, the outcomes in the same order were 9%∗, 16%∗, and 18%; 2%∗, 0%, and 9%∗ (asterisks indicate not meeting the global cut-off), respectively. CONCLUSION: A North American center was able to achieve outcomes comparable to the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resection.

An international multicentre evaluation of treatment strategies for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma✰.

Background & Aims: Management of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is not well-defined. Therefore, we evaluated the management of cHCC-CCA using an online hospital-wide multicentre survey sent to expert centres. Methods: A survey was sent to members of the European Network for the Study of Cholangiocarcinoma (ENS-CCA) and the International Cholangiocarcinoma Research Network (ICRN), in July 2021. To capture the respondents' contemporary decision-making process, a hypothetical case study with different tumour size and number combinations was embedded. Results: Of 155 surveys obtained, 87 (56%) were completed in full and included for analysis. Respondents represented Europe (68%), North America (20%), Asia (11%), and South America (1%) and included surgeons (46%), oncologists (29%), and hepatologists/gastroenterologists (25%). Two-thirds of the respondents included at least one new patient with cHCC-CCA per year. Liver resection was reported as the most likely treatment for a single cHCC-CCA lesion of 2.0-6.0 cm (range: 73-93%) and for two lesions, one up to 6 cm and a second well-defined lesion of 2.0 cm (range: 60-66%). Nonetheless, marked interdisciplinary differences were noted. Surgeons mainly adhered to resection if technically feasible, whereas up to half of the hepatologists/gastroenterologists and oncologists switched to alternative treatment options with increasing tumour burden. Fifty-one (59%) clinicians considered liver transplantation as an option for patients with cHCC-CCA, with the Milan criteria defining the upper limit of inclusion. Overall, well-defined cHCC-CCA treatment policies were lacking and management was most often dependent on local expertise. Conclusions: Liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Marked interdisciplinary differences were reported, depending on local expertise. These findings stress the need for a well-defined multicentre prospective trial comparing treatments, including liver transplantation, to optimise the therapeutic management of cHCC-CCA. Impact and implications: Because the treatment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA), a rare form of liver cancer, is currently not well-defined, we evaluated the contemporary treatment of this rare tumour type through an online survey sent to expert centres around the world. Based on the responses from 87 clinicians (46% surgeons, 29% oncologists, 25% hepatologists/gastroenterologists), representing four continents and 25 different countries, we found that liver resection is considered the first-line treatment of cHCC-CCA, with many clinicians supporting liver transplantation within limits. Nonetheless, marked differences in treatment decisions were reported among the different specialties (surgeon vs. oncologist vs. hepatologist/gastroenterologist), highlighting the urgent need for a standardisation of therapeutic strategies for patients with cHCC-CCA.

Outcomes after liver transplantation using deceased after circulatory death donors: A comparison of outcomes in the UK and the US.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Identifying international differences in utilization and outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) after donation after circulatory death (DCD) donation provides a unique opportunity for benchmarking and population-level insight. METHODS: Adult (≥18 years) LT data between 2008 and 2018 from the UK and US were used to assess mortality and graft failure after DCD LT. We used time-dependent Cox-regression methods to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for risk-adjusted short-term (0-90 days) and longer-term (90 days-5 years) outcomes. RESULTS: One-thousand five-hundred-and-sixty LT receipts from the UK and 3426 from the US were included. Over the study period, the use of DCD livers increased from 15.7% to 23.9% in the UK compared to 5.1% to 7.6% in the US. In the UK, DCD donors were older (UK:51 vs. US:33 years) with longer cold ischaemia time (UK: 437 vs. US: 333 min). Recipients in the US had higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, higher body mass index, higher proportions of ascites, encephalopathy, diabetes and previous abdominal surgeries. No difference in the risk-adjusted short-term mortality or graft failure was observed between the countries. In the longer-term (90 days-5 years), the UK had lower mortality and graft failure (adj.mortality HR:UK: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.49-0.80); graft failure HR: UK: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.91). The cumulative incidence of retransplantation was higher in the UK (5 years: UK: 11.9% vs. 4.6%; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: For those receiving a DCD LT, longer-term post-transplant outcomes in the UK are superior to the US, however, significant differences in recipient illness, graft quality and access to retransplantation were seen between the two countries.

Outcomes of liver transplantation in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) versus non-NASH associated hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a rising indication for liver transplantation. This unique population, with multiple comorbidities, has potential for worse post-transplant outcomes. We compared post-transplant survival of NASH and non-NASH HCC patients using a large cohort. METHODS: Adults transplanted for HCC between 2008 and 2018, from United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and University Health Network (UHN) databases were divided into two populations: NASH and non-NASH. Recipient characteristics and post-transplant survival were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed within and beyond Milan criteria. RESULTS: 2071 of 20,672 (10.0%) patients underwent transplantation for NASH HCC, with annual proportional increase of 1.2%UHN (p = 0.02) and 1.3%UNOS (p < 0.001). The 1-,3-,5-year post-transplant survival were 90.8%, 83.9%, 76.3% NASH HCC versus 91.9%, 82.1%, 74.9% non-NASH HCC (p = 0.94). No survival differences were observed in populations within or beyond Milan. Competing-risk analysis demonstrated no differences in risk for cardiovascular-related death (HR1.24, 95%CI 0.87-1.55, p = 0.16), or HCC recurrence-related death (HR1.21, 95%CI 0.89-1.65, p = 0.23). NASH HCC patients had lower risk of liver-related deaths (HR0.57, 95%CI 0.34-0.98, p = 0.04). DISCUSSION: NASH HCC is a rising indication for liver transplantation. Despite demographic differences, no post-transplantation survival differences were observed between NASH and non-NASH HCC. This justifies equivalent organ allocation, irrespective of NASH status.

Lymphopenia at the time of transplant is associated with short-term mortality after deceased donor liver transplantation.

Absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) is considered a surrogate marker for nutritional status and immunocompetence. We investigated the association between ALC and post-liver transplant outcomes in patients who received a deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT). Patients were categorized by ALC at liver transplant: low (<500/µL), mid (500-1000/µL), and high ALC (>1000/µL). Our main analysis used retrospective data (2013-2018) for DDLT recipients from Henry Ford Hospital (United States); the results were further validated using data from the Toronto General Hospital (Canada). Among 449 DDLT recipients, the low ALC group demonstrated higher 180-day mortality than mid and high ALC groups (83.1% vs 95.8% and 97.4%, respectively; low vs mid: P = .001; low vs high: P < .001). A larger proportion of patients with low ALC died of sepsis compared with the combined mid/high groups (9.1% vs 0.8%; P < .001). In multivariable analysis, pretransplant ALC was associated with 180-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.20; P = .004). Patients with low ALC had higher rates of bacteremia (22.7% vs 8.1%; P < .001) and cytomegaloviremia (15.2% vs 6.8%; P = .03) than patients with mid/high ALC. Low ALC pretransplant through postoperative day 30 was associated with 180-day mortality among patients who received rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction (P = .001). Pretransplant lymphopenia is associated with short-term mortality and a higher incidence of posttransplant infections in DDLT patients.

Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is prognostic for early recurrence after curative intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma resection.

Backgrounds/Aims: Within two years of surgery, 70% of resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) recur. Better biomarkers are needed to identify those at risk of "early recurrence" (ER). In this study, we defined ER and investigated whether preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and systemic-inflammatory index were prognostic of both overall relapse and ER after curative hepatectomy for iCCA. Methods: A retrospective cohort of patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for iCCA between 2005 and 2017 were created. The cut-off timepoint for the ER of iCCA was estimated using a piecewise linear regression model. Univariable analyses of recurrence were conducted for the overall, early, and late recurrence periods. For the early and late recurrence periods, multivariable Cox regression with time-varying regression coefficient analysis was used. Results: A total of 113 patients were included in this study. ER was defined as recurrence within 12 months of a curative resection. Among the included patients, 38.1% experienced ER. In the univariable model, a higher preoperative NLR (> 4.3) was significantly associated with an increased risk of recurrence overall and in the first 12 months after curative surgery. In the multivariable model, a higher NLR was associated with a higher recurrence rate overall and in the ER period (≤ 12 months), but not in the late recurrence period. Conclusions: Preoperative NLR was prognostic of both overall recurrence and ER after curative iCCA resection. NLR is easily obtained before and after surgery and should be integrated into ER prediction tools to guide preoperative treatments and intensify postoperative follow-up.

Machine learning-based mortality prediction models using national liver transplantation registries are feasible but have limited utility across countries.

Many countries curate national registries of liver transplant (LT) data. These registries are often used to generate predictive models; however, potential performance and transferability of these models remain unclear. We used data from 3 national registries and developed machine learning algorithm (MLA)-based models to predict 90-day post-LT mortality within and across countries. Predictive performance and external validity of each model were assessed. Prospectively collected data of adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who underwent primary LTs between January 2008 and December 2018 from the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (United Kingdom), and United Network for Organ Sharing (United States) were used to develop MLA models to predict 90-day post-LT mortality. Models were developed using each registry individually (based on variables inherent to the individual databases) and using all 3 registries combined (variables in common between the registries [harmonized]). The model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. The number of patients included was as follows: Canada, n = 1214; the United Kingdom, n = 5287; and the United States, n = 59,558. The best performing MLA-based model was ridge regression across both individual registries and harmonized data sets. Model performance diminished from individualized to the harmonized registries, especially in Canada (individualized ridge: AUROC, 0.74; range, 0.73-0.74; harmonized: AUROC, 0.68; range, 0.50-0.73) and US (individualized ridge: AUROC, 0.71; range, 0.70-0.71; harmonized: AUROC, 0.66; range, 0.66-0.66) data sets. External model performance across countries was poor overall. MLA-based models yield a fair discriminatory potential when used within individual databases. However, the external validity of these models is poor when applied across countries. Standardization of registry-based variables could facilitate the added value of MLA-based models in informing decision making in future LTs.

Association of Viral Hepatitis Status and Post-hepatectomy Outcomes in the Era of Direct-Acting Antivirals.

BACKGROUND: The role of viral hepatitis status in post-hepatectomy outcomes has yet to be delineated. This large, multicentred contemporary study aimed to evaluate the effect of viral hepatitis status on 30-day post-hepatectomy complications in patients treated for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database with known viral hepatitis status, who underwent hepatectomy for HCC between 2014 and 2018, were included. Patients were classified as HBV-only, HCV-only, HBV and HCV co-infection (HBV/HCV), or no viral hepatitis (NV). Multivariable models were used to assess outcomes of interest. The primary outcome was any 30-day post-hepatectomy complication. The secondary outcomes were major complications and post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). Subgroup analyses were performed for cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients. RESULTS: A total of 3234 patients were included. The 30-day complication rate was 207/663 (31.2%) HBV, 356/1077 (33.1%) HCV, 29/81 (35.8%) HBV/HCV, and 534/1413 (37.8%) NV (p = 0.01). On adjusted analysis, viral hepatitis status was not associated with occurrence of any 30-day post-hepatectomy complications (ref: NV, HBV odds ratio (OR) 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-1.12]; HCV OR 0.91 [95% CI: 0.75-1.10]; HBV/HCV OR 1.17 [95% CI: 0.71-1.93]). Similar results were found in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic subgroups, and for secondary outcomes: occurrence of any major complications and PHLF. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HCC managed with resection, viral hepatitis status is not associated with 30-day post-hepatectomy complications, major complications, or PHLF compared with NV. This suggests that clinical decisions and prognostication of 30-day outcomes in this population likely should not be made based on viral hepatitis status.

Long-term outcomes of retransplantation after live donor liver transplantation: A Western experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite most liver transplants in North America being from deceased donors, the number of living donor liver transplants has increased over the last decade. Although outcomes of liver retransplantation after deceased donor liver transplantation have been widely published, outcomes of retransplant after living donor liver transplant need to be further elucidated. METHOD: We aimed to compare waitlist outcomes and survival post-retransplant in recipients of initial living or deceased donor grafts. Adult liver recipients relisted at University Health Network between April 2000 and October 2020 were retrospectively identified and grouped according to their initial graft: living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplant. A competing risk multivariable model evaluated the association between graft type at first transplant and outcomes after relisting. Survival after retransplant waitlisting (intention-to-treat) and after retransplant (per protocol) were also assessed. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the effect of initial graft type on survival after retransplant. RESULTS: A total of 201 recipients were relisted (living donor liver transplants, n = 67; donor liver transplants, n = 134) and 114 underwent retransplant (living donor liver transplants, n = 48; deceased donor liver transplants, n = 66). The waitlist mortality with an initial living donor liver transplant was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-1.10; P = .08). Both unadjusted and adjusted graft loss risks were similar post-retransplant. The risk-adjusted overall intention-to-treat survival after relisting (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.32; P = .30) and per protocol survival after retransplant (hazard ratio:1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-4.19; P = .40) were equivalent in those who initially received a living donor liver transplant. CONCLUSION: Patients requiring relisting and retransplant after either living donor liver transplants or deceased donor liver transplantation experience similar waitlist and survival outcomes.

Trends in liver transplantation for autoimmune liver diseases: a Canadian study.

BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, no analysis of data from liver transplantation registries exists in Canada. We aimed to describe temporal trends in the number of liver transplantation procedures, patient characteristics and posttransplantation outcomes for autoimmune liver diseases (AILDs) in Canada. METHODS: We used administrative data from the Canadian Organ Replacement Register, which contains liver transplantation information from 6 centres in Canada. This study included transplantation information from 5 of the centres, as liver transplantation procedures in children were not included. We included adult (age ≥ 18 yr) patients with a diagnosis of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) or overlap syndrome (PBC-AIH or PSC-AIH) who received a liver transplant from 2000 to 2018. RESULTS: Of 5722 primary liver transplantation procedures performed over the study period, 1070 (18.7%) were for an AILD: 489 (45.7%) for PSC, 341 (31.9%) for PBC, 220 (20.6%) for AIH and 20 (1.9%) for overlap syndrome. There was a significant increase in the absolute number of procedures for PSC, with a yearly increase of 0.6 (95% confidence interval 0.1 to 1.2), whereas the absolute number of procedures for PBC and AIH remained stable. The proportion of transplantation procedures decreased for PBC and AIH but remained stable for PSC. Recipient age at transplantation increased over time for males with PBC (median 53 yr in 2000-2005 to 57 yr in 2012-2018, p = 0.03); whereas the median age among patients with AIH decreased, from 53 years in 2000-2005 to 44 years in 2006-2011 (p = 0.03). The Model for Endstage Liver Disease score at the time of transplantation increased over time for all AILDs, particularly AIH (median 16 in 2000-2005 v. 24 in 2012-2018, p < 0.001). There was a trend toward improved survival in the PBC group, with a 5-year survival rate of 81% in 2000-2005 and 90% in 2012-2018 (p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Between 2000 and 2018, the absolute number of liver transplantation procedures in Canada increased for PSC but remained stable for PBC and AIH; proportionally, PBC and AIH decreased as indications for transplantation. Posttransplantation survival improved only for the PBC group. An improved understanding of trends and outcomes on a national scale among patients with AILD undergoing liver transplantation can identify disparities and areas for potential health care improvement.

Low utilization of adult-to-adult LDLT in Western countries despite excellent outcomes: International multicenter analysis of the US, the UK, and Canada.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplant waitlist and reduce waitlist mortality. We sought to compare donor and recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes after LDLT in the US, the UK, and Canada. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort-study of adults (≥18-years) who underwent primary LDLT between Jan-2008 and Dec-2018 from three national liver transplantation registries: United Network for Organ Sharing (US), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (UK), and the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada). Patients undergoing retransplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable adjustments were performed using Cox proportional-hazards models with mixed-effect modeling. RESULTS: A total of 2,954 living donor liver transplants were performed (US: n = 2,328; Canada: n = 529; UK: n = 97). Canada has maintained the highest proportion of LDLT utilization over time (proportion of LDLT in 2008 - US: 3.3%; Canada: 19.5%; UK: 1.7%; p <0.001 - in 2018 - US: 5.0%; Canada: 13.6%; UK: 0.4%; p <0.001). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 92.6%, 82.8%, and 70.0% in the US vs. 96.1%, 89.9%, and 82.2% in Canada vs. 91.4%, 85.4%, and 66.7% in the UK. After adjustment for characteristics of donors, recipients, transplant year, and treating transplant center as a random effect, all countries had a non-statistically significantly different mortality hazard post-LDLT (Ref US: Canada hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.05; UK hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.59-2.02, p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The use of LDLT has remained low in the US, the UK and Canada. Despite this, long-term survival is excellent. Continued efforts to increase LDLT utilization in these countries may be warranted due to the growing waitlist and differences in allocation that may disadvantage patients currently awaiting liver transplantation. LAY SUMMARY: This multicenter international comparative analysis of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada demonstrates that despite low use of the procedure, the long-term outcomes are excellent. In addition, the mortality risk is not statistically significantly different between the evaluated countries. However, the incidence and risk of retransplantation differs between the countries, being the highest in the United Kingdom and lowest in the United States.

Is it safe to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy to patients undergoing hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma? ACS-NSQIP propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is increasing. The objective of this study was to compare the 30-day post-operative complications and length-of-stay (LOS) between patients undergoing hepatectomy for iCCA with and without NAC. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using the ACS-NSQIP database queried from 2014 to 2018. Patients with NAC receipt were propensity-score matched into 1:3 ratio with controls using the greedy-matching algorithm and a caliper of 0.2. Logistic and Poisson regression models were used to estimate the effect sizes. RESULTS: A total of 1508 patients who underwent hepatectomy for iCCA were included. 706 patients remained after matching and balance were achieved. The NAC group had 110 (60.1%) complications vs. 289 (55.3%) complications in the non-NAC group (p = 0.29). NAC was not associated with worse 30-day postoperative complications [OR 1.24, 95% CI: 0.87-1.76; p = 0.24]. Post-operative LOS in the NAC group was 8.56 days (mean, SD 7.4) vs. non-NAC group 9.27 days (mean, SD 8.41, p = 0.32). NAC was not associated with longer post-operative LOS [RR 0.93, 95% CI:0.80, 1.08; p = 0.32]. CONCLUSION: NAC may be safely administered without increasing the risk of 30-day complications or post-operative hospital LOS.

Outcomes of Adult Liver Retransplantation: A Canadian National Database Analysis.

Background: Liver retransplantation remains as the only treatment for graft failure. This investigation aims to assess the incidence, post-transplant outcomes, and risk factors in liver retransplantation recipients in Canada. Materials and Methods: The Canadian Organ Replacement Register was used to obtain and analyse data on all adult liver retransplant recipients, matched donors, transplant-specific variables, and post-transplant outcomes from January 2000 to December 2018. Results: 377 (6.5%) patients underwent liver retransplantation. Autoimmune liver disease and hepatitis C virus (HCV) were the most common underlying diagnoses. Graft failure was 7.9% and 12.5%, and overall survival was 77.1% and 65.6% at 1 year and 5 years, respectively. In contrast to recipients receiving their first graft transplant, the retransplantation group had a significantly higher incidence of graft failure (p < 0.001) and lower overall survival (p < 0.001). The graft failure and patient survival rates were comparable between second transplant and repeat retransplant recipients. Furthermore, there were no differences in graft failure and patient survival when stratified according to time to retransplantation. Recipient and donor age (HR = 1.12, p=0.011; HR = 1.09, p=0.008), recipient HCV status (HR = 1.81, p=0.014), and donor cytomegalovirus status (HR = 4.10, p=0.006) were predictors of patient mortality. Conclusion: This analysis of liver retransplantation demonstrates that this is a safe treatment for early and late graft failure. Furthermore, even in patients requiring more than two grafts, similar outcomes to initial retransplantation can be achieved with careful selection.

Recipient and Donor Outcomes After Living-Donor Liver Transplant for Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases.

Importance: Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death, and nearly 70% of patients with this cancer have unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLMs). Compared with chemotherapy, liver transplant has been reported to improve survival in patients with CRLMs, but in North America, liver allograft shortages make the use of deceased-donor allografts for this indication problematic. Objective: To examine survival outcomes of living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) for unresectable, liver-confined CRLMs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study included patients at 3 North American liver transplant centers with established LDLT programs, 2 in the US and 1 in Canada. Patients with liver-confined, unresectable CRLMs who had demonstrated sustained disease control on oncologic therapy met the inclusion criteria for LDLT. Patients included in this study underwent an LDLT between July 2017 and October 2020 and were followed up until May 1, 2021. Exposures: Living-donor liver transplant. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perioperative morbidity and mortality of treated patients and donors, assessed by univariate statistics, and 1.5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of recurrence-free and overall survival for transplant recipients. Results: Of 91 evaluated patients, 10 (11%) underwent LDLT (6 [60%] male; median age, 45 years [range, 35-58 years]). Among the 10 living donors, 7 (70%) were male, and the median age was 40.5 years (range, 27-50 years). Kaplan-Meier estimates for recurrence-free and overall survival at 1.5 years after LDLT were 62% and 100%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity for both donors and recipients was consistent with established standards (Clavien-Dindo complications among recipients: 3 [10%] had none, 3 [30%] had grade II, and 4 [40%] had grade III; donors: 5 [50%] had none, 4 [40%] had grade I, and 1 had grade III). Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings of recurrence-free and overall survival rates suggest that select patients with unresectable, liver-confined CRLMs may benefit from total hepatectomy and LDLT.

Dynamic risk profiling of HCC recurrence after curative intent liver resection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Following liver resection (LR) for HCC, the likelihood of survival is dynamic, in that multiple recurrences and/or metastases are possible, each having variable impacts on outcomes. We sought to evaluate the natural progression, pattern, and timing of various disease states after LR for HCC using multistate modeling and to create a practical calculator to provide prognostic information for patients and clinicians. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult patients undergoing LR for HCC between January 2000 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified at a single center. Multistate analysis modeled post-LR tumor progression by describing transitions between distinct disease states. In this model, the states included surgery, intrahepatic recurrence (first, second, third, fourth, fifth), distant metastasis with or without intrahepatic recurrence, and death. Of the 486 patients included, 169 (34.8%) remained recurrence-free, 205 (42.2%) developed intrahepatic recurrence, 80 (16.5%) developed distant metastasis, and 32 (7%) died. For an average patient having undergone LR, there was a 33.1% chance of remaining disease-free, a 31.0% chance of at least one intrahepatic recurrence, a 16.3% chance of distant metastasis, and a 19.8% chance of death within the first 60 months post-LR. The transition probability from surgery to first intrahepatic recurrence, without a subsequent state transition, increased from 3% (3 months) to 17.4% (30 months) and 17.2% (60 months). Factors that could modify these probabilities included tumor size, satellite lesions, and microvascular invasion. The online multistate model calculator can be found on https://multistatehcc.shinyapps.io/home/. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to standard single time-to-event estimates, multistate modeling provides more realistic prognostication of outcomes after LR for HCC by taking into account many postoperative disease states and transitions between them. Our multistate modeling calculator can provide meaningful data to guide the management of patients undergoing postoperative surveillance and therapy.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Factors for Early Recurrence in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma After Curative-Intent Resection.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence rates of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) after curative hepatectomy are as high as 50% to 70%, and about half of these recurrences occur within 2 years. This systematic review aims to define prognostic factors (PFs) for early recurrence (ER, within 24 months) and 24-month disease-free survival (DFS) after curative-intent iCCA resections. METHODS: Systematic searching was performed from database inception to 14 January 2021. Duplicate independent review and data extraction were performed. Data on 13 predefined PFs were collected. Meta-analysis was performed on PFs for ER and summarized using forest plots. The Quality in Prognostic Factor Studies tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. RESULTS: The study enrolled 10 studies comprising 4158 patients during an accrual period ranging from 1990 to 2016. In the risk-of-bias assessment of patients who experienced ER after curative-intent iCCA resection, six studies were rated as low risk and four as moderate risk (49.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 49.2-50.0). Nine studies were pooled for meta-analysis. Of the postoperative PFs, multiple tumors, microvascular invasion, macrovascular invasion, lymph node metastasis, and R1 resection were associated with an increased hazard for ER or a reduced 24-month DFS, and the opposite was observed for receipt of adjuvant chemo/radiation therapy. Of the preoperative factors, cirrhosis, sex, HBV status were not associated with ER or 24-month DFS. CONCLUSION: The findings from this systematic review could allow for improved surveillance, prognostication, and treatment decision-making for patients with resectable iCCAs. Further well-designed prospective studies are needed to explore prognostic factors for iCCA ER with a focus on preoperative variables.

Prognostic factors of overall survival in patients with recurrent disease following liver resection for colorectal cancer metastases: A multicenter external validation study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical course of patients experiencing recurrence following hepatectomy for colorectal cancer metastases (CRM) is poorly defined. Previous studies associated shorter time to recurrence (TTR) in months, node-positive primary tumor, and more than one site of recurrence with worse outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study across four Canadian institutions to externally validate previously established prognostic factors of overall survival (OS). We included consecutive adult patients who had a recurrence following curative-intent liver resection for CRM. Prognostic factors were explored using a multivariable Cox regression model. Risk group cutoffs were identified through recursive partitioning. OS between low- and high-risk groups was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: This study included 471 patients. Shorter TTR in months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-0.97), presence of extrahepatic disease at first hepatectomy (HR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.18-5.50), and larger tumor size in millimetres (HR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.02) were associated with worse OS. Median OS in the high- and low-risk groups were 40.5 (95% CI: 34.0-45.7 months) versus 64.7 months (95% CI: 57.9-72.3 months; p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We externally validated the prognostic significance of shorter TTR (<8.5 months) as a predictor of worse OS in patients who recur the following hepatectomy for CRM.