Recipient age influences survival after liver transplant: Results of the French national cohort 2007-2017.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, age at liver transplantation (LT) has markedly increased. In the context of organ shortage, we investigated the impact of recipient age on post-transplantation mortality. METHODS: All adult patients who received a first LT between 2007 and 2017 were included in this cross-sectional study. Recipients' characteristics at the time of listing, donor and surgery data, post-operative complications and follow-up of vital status were retrieved from the national transplantation database. The impact of age on 5-year overall mortality post-LT was estimated using a flexible multivariable parametric model which was also used to estimate the association between age and 10-year net survival, accounting for expected age- and sex-related mortality. RESULTS: Among the 7610 patients, 21.4% were aged 60-65 years, and 15.7% over 65. With increasing age, comorbidities increased but severity of liver disease decreased. Older recipient age was associated with decreased observed survival at 5 years after LT (p < .001), with a significant effect particularly during the first 2 years. The linear increase in the risk of death associated with age does not allow any definition of an age's threshold for LT (p = .832). Other covariates associated with an increased risk of 5-year death were dialysis and mechanical ventilation at transplant, transfusion during LT, hepatocellular carcinoma and donor age. Ten-year flexible net survival analysis confirmed these results. CONCLUSION: Although there was a selection process for older recipients, increasing age at LT was associated with an increased risk of death, particularly in the first years after LT.

Screening and management of portal hypertension in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A French practice survey.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension (PHT) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are two major complications of cirrhosis that are closely linked and impact patients prognosis, particularly acute variceal bleeding (AVB). Therefore, PHT screening and AVB prophylaxis are major issues to improve the outcome of the patients, but practices may vary among physicians. METHODS: We submitted hepatologists, gastroenterologists and digestive oncologists to a questionnaire of 70 items about PHT screening and management to evaluate their practice. RESULTS: 95 out of 847 physicians responded to the questionnaire (hepatologists 63.2%, Oncologists/gastroenterologists 36.8%). In patients with advanced HCC, PHT was assessed by endoscopy in 80.0% of cases. HCC progression motivated a new for 12.6% of respondents while no intent to control was declared for 49.5% of them. AVB primary prophylaxis for large size esophageal varices (EV) was impacted by the presence of red marks at endoscopy. In the absence of a red mark, prophylaxis with non-selective betablockers (NSSB) was proposed in 70.5% of cases for patients undergoing TKI and 63.2% undergoing Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab, whereas the combination of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and NSBB was preferred in 41.1% of patients undergoing TKI versus 53.7% undergoing Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab in case of a red mark. The initiation of a systemic treatment was lower in patients with an history of AVB <6 months, which was even more significant for Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab combination (51.6%) compared to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (72.6%) (p<0.001). Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab was initiated in 43% of participants in case of AVB <6 months versus 95% if >6 months (p<0.001). In case of AVB on Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab, 43.2% continued the treatment after regression of EV, 24.2% continued Atezolizumab alone and 14.7% permanently stopped the treatment. CONCLUSION: Strategies for screening and management of PHT in advanced HCC remain very heterogeneous among physicians, suggesting the need to improve PHT knowledge and dedicated studies for advanced HCC.