Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 218
Filter
1.
J Transplant ; 2024: 9024204, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38725471

ABSTRACT

The increasing prevalence of steatotic liver disease (SLD) in potential living donors is concerning, as it limits donor's availability amid rising demand. OPTIFAST very low-calorie diet (VLCD), a meal replacement product, effectively reduces weight and hepatic steatosis before transplantation. However, data on the outcomes of recipients of VLCD-treated donors are lacking. We conducted a single-center, retrospective study on 199 living donor liver transplant recipients at Toronto General Hospital, Canada, between January 2015 and January 2020. We compared the 1-year posttransplant outcomes between recipients who received organs from donors treated with VLCD (N = 34) for either weight loss or steatosis reduction, with those who did not require treatment (N = 165). Our analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in the rates of postoperative complications (23% vs 32.4%, p=0.3) or intensive care unit stays (70.9% vs 70.6%, p=1) between recipients of non-VLCD and VLCD grafts. Following adjusted multivariate logistic regression, receipt of VLCD grafts was not associated with increased hospital length of stay. In addition, one-year mortality did not differ between the two groups (4.2% non-VLCD recipients vs 2.9% VLCD recipients, p=0.6). OPTIFAST VLCD treatment for liver donors demonstrates positive and safe outcomes in recipients, expanding the pool of potential living donors for increased organ availability.

3.
Liver Transpl ; 2024 Apr 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38619393

ABSTRACT

Background Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers the opportunity to decrease waitlist time and mortality for patients with AILD; autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). We compared the survival of patients with a potential live donor (pLDLT) on the waitlist vs. no potential live donor (pDDLT), on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. Methods Our retrospective cohort study investigated adults with AILD listed for liver transplant at our program between 2000 and 2021. The pLDLT group comprised recipients with a potential live donor. Otherwise, they were included in the pDDLT group. ITT survival was assessed from the time of listing. Results 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 ITT survival rates were higher for pLDLT vs. 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 PSC 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]). Conclusion Our study suggests that having a potential live donor could decrease the risk of death in patients with PSC on the waitlist. Importantly, the post-transplant outcomes in this population are similar between the LDLT and DDLT groups.

4.
Am J Transplant ; 2024 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38428639

ABSTRACT

In living-donor liver transplantation, biliary complications including bile leaks and biliary anastomotic strictures remain significant challenges, with incidences varying across different centers. This multicentric retrospective study (2016-2020) included 3633 adult patients from 18 centers and aimed to identify risk factors for these biliary complications and their impact on patient survival. Incidences of bile leaks and biliary strictures were 11.4% and 20.6%, respectively. Key risk factors for bile leaks included multiple bile duct anastomoses (odds ratio, [OR] 1.8), Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (OR, 1.4), and a history of major abdominal surgery (OR, 1.4). For biliary anastomotic strictures, risk factors were ABO incompatibility (OR, 1.4), blood loss >1 L (OR, 1.4), and previous abdominal surgery (OR, 1.7). Patients experiencing biliary complications had extended hospital stays, increased incidence of major complications, and higher comprehensive complication index scores. The impact on graft survival became evident after accounting for immortal time bias using time-dependent covariate survival analysis. Bile leaks and biliary anastomotic strictures were associated with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.7 and 1.8 for graft survival, respectively. The study underscores the importance of minimizing these risks through careful donor selection and preoperative planning, as biliary complications significantly affect graft survival, despite the availability of effective treatments.

5.
Cancer ; 2024 Feb 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38361443

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The incidence of biliary tract cancers (BTC) appears to be increasing worldwide. We analyzed the characteristics of BTC-related hospitalizations under medical services across 28 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This study uses data collected by GEMINI, a hospital research data network. BTC-related hospitalizations from 2015 to 2021 under the Department of Medicine or intensive care unit were captured using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, codes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder cancers. RESULTS: A total of 4596 BTC-related hospitalizations (2720 iCCA, 1269 extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 607 gallbladder cancers) were analyzed. The number of unique patients with BTC-related hospitalizations increased over time. For iCCA-related hospitalizations, the total number of hospitalizations increased (from 385 in 2016 to 420 in 2021, p = .005), the hospital length of stay decreased over the study period (mean 10 days [SD, 12] in 2016 to 9 days [SD, 8] in 2021, p = .04), and the number of in-hospital deaths was stable (from 68 [18%] in 2016 to 55 [13%] in 2021, p = .62). Other outcomes such as 30-day readmissions, medical imaging tests, intensive care unit-specific hospitalizations, and length of stay were stable over time for all cohorts. The cost of hospitalization for the BTC cohort increased from median $8203 CAD (interquartile range, 5063-15,543) in 2017 to $8507 CAD (interquartile range, 5345-14,755) in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world data analysis showed a rising number of patients with BTC-related hospitalizations and rising number of iCCA-related hospitalizations across 28 hospitals in Ontario between 2015 and 2021.

6.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 2024 Feb 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38334851

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) after liver resection (LR) remains high, and optimal therapy for recurrent ICC is challenging. Herein, we assess the outcomes of patients undergoing repeat resection for recurrent ICC in a large, international multicenter cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes of adults from six large hepatobiliary centers in North America, Europe, and Asia with recurrent ICC following primary LR between 2001 and 2015 were analyzed. Cox models determined predictors of post-recurrence survival. RESULTS: Of patients undergoing LR for ICC, 499 developed recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 10 months, and 47% were intrahepatic. Overall 3-year post-recurrence survival rate was 28.6%. In total, 121 patients (25%) underwent repeat resection, including 74 (61%) repeat LRs. Surgically treated patients were more likely to have solitary intrahepatic recurrences and significantly prolonged survival compared with those receiving locoregional or systemic therapy alone with a 3-year post-recurrence survival rate of 47%. Independent predictors of post-recurrence death included time to recurrence < 1 year [HR 1.66 (1.32-2.10), p < 0.001], site of recurrence [HR 1.74 (1.28-2.38), p < 0.001], macrovascular invasion [HR 1.43 (1.05-1.95), p = 0.024], and size of recurrence > 3 cm [HR 1.68 (1.24-2.29), p = 0.001]. Repeat resection was independently associated with decreased post-recurrence death [HR 0.58 0.43-0.78), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat resection for recurrent ICC in select patients can result in extended survival. Thus, challenging the paradigm of offering these patients locoregional or chemo/palliative therapy alone as the mainstay of treatment.

7.
JHEP Rep ; 6(2): 100965, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38304238

ABSTRACT

Liver transplantation (LT) was originally described by Starzl as a promising strategy to treat primary malignancies of the liver. Confronted with high recurrence rates, indications drifted towards non-oncologic liver diseases with LT finally evolving from a high-risk surgery to an almost routine surgical procedure. Continuously improving outcomes following LT and evolving oncological treatment strategies have driven renewed interest in transplant oncology. This is not only reflected by constant refinements to the criteria for LT in patients with HCC, but especially by efforts to expand indications to other primary and secondary liver malignancies. With new patient-centred oncological treatments on the rise and new technologies to expand the donor pool, the field has the chance to come full circle. In this review, we focus on the concept of transplant oncology, current indications, as well as technical and ethical aspects in the context of donor organs as precious resources.

8.
Curr Opin Organ Transplant ; 29(2): 161-171, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38258823

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Using transplant oncology principles, selected patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) may achieve long-term survival after liver transplantation. Strategies for identifying and managing these patients are discussed in this review. RECENT FINDINGS: Unlike initial reports, several modern series have reported positive outcomes after liver transplantation for iCCA. The main challenges are in identifying the appropriate candidates and graft scarcity. Tumor burden and response to neoadjuvant therapies have been successfully used to identify favorable biology in unresectable cases. New molecular biomarkers will probably predict this response in the future. Also, new technologies and better strategies have been used to increase graft availability for these patients without affecting the liver waitlist. SUMMARY: Liver transplantation for the management of patients with unresectable iCCA is currently a reality under strict research protocols. Who is a candidate for transplantation, when to use neoadjuvant and locoregional therapies, and how to increase graft availability are the main topics of this review.


Subject(s)
Bile Duct Neoplasms , Cholangiocarcinoma , Liver Transplantation , Humans , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Cholangiocarcinoma/surgery , Cholangiocarcinoma/pathology , Biomarkers , Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic/pathology , Bile Duct Neoplasms/surgery , Bile Duct Neoplasms/pathology
10.
Ann Surg ; 279(1): 104-111, 2024 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37522174

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Liver Transplantation , Adult , Humans , Liver Transplantation/methods , Living Donors , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/etiology , Patient Selection , North America , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
12.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 31(2): 697-700, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37996635

ABSTRACT

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and half of patients present with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). Liver transplant (LT) has emerged as a treatment modality for otherwise unresectable CRLM. Since the publication of the Lebeck-Lee systematic review in 2022, additional evidence has come to light supporting LT for CRLM in highly selected patients. This includes reports of >10-year follow-up with over 80% survival rates in low-risk patients. As these updated reports have significantly changed our collective knowledge, this article is intended to serve as an update to the 2022 systematic review to include the most up-to-date evidence on the subject.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Liver Neoplasms , Liver Transplantation , Humans , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Hepatectomy , Liver Neoplasms/secondary , Systematic Reviews as Topic
13.
Ann Hepatol ; 29(1): 101168, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37858675

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Recurrent cirrhosis complicates 10-30% of Liver transplants (LT) and can lead to consideration for re-transplantation. We evaluated the trajectories of relisted versus primary listed patients on the waitlist using a competing risk framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 1,912 patients listed for LT at our centre between from 2012 to 2020. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess overall survival (OS) by listing type and competing risk analysis Fine-Gray models were used to assess cumulative incidence of transplant by listing type. RESULTS: 1,731 patients were included (104 relisted). 44.2% of relisted patients received exception points vs. 19.8% of primary listed patients (p<0.001). Patients relisted without exceptions, representing those with graft cirrhosis, had the worst OS (HR: 4.17, 95%CI 2.63 - 6.67, p=<0.0001) and lowest instantaneous rate of transplant (HR: 0.56, 95%CI 0.38 - 0.83, p=0.006) than primary listed with exception points. On multivariate analysis listing type, height, bilirubin and INR were associated with cumulative incidence of transplant, while listing type, bilirubin, INR, sodium, creatinine were associated with OS. Within relisted patients, there was a trend towards higher mortality (HR: 1.79, 95%CI 0.91 - 3.52, p=0.08) and low transplant incidence (HR: 0.51, 95%CI 0.22 - 1.15, p=0.07) for graft cirrhosis vs other relisting indications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients relisted for LT are carefully curated and comprise a minority of the waitlist population. Despite their younger age, they have worse liver/kidney function, poor waitlist survival, and decreased transplant incidence suggesting the need for early relisting, while considering standardized exception points.


Subject(s)
Liver Transplantation , Humans , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Liver Cirrhosis/diagnosis , Liver Cirrhosis/epidemiology , Liver Cirrhosis/surgery , Proportional Hazards Models , Waiting Lists , Bilirubin
14.
Hepatology ; 2023 Dec 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38108634

ABSTRACT

Immune-oncology-based regimens have shown efficacy in advanced HCC and have been implemented as standard of care as first-line therapy. Their efficacy, including high response rates, and safety justify their evaluation in earlier disease stages. Following negative results for adjuvant sorafenib in the global STORM trial in 2015, 4 global phase 3 trials, featuring different immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations, entered in parallel the race in the adjuvant setting. The IMbrave050 trial, comparing adjuvant atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab to active surveillance following curative-intent resection or ablation, was the first to report, fast-tracking the results of the first interim analysis and demonstrating an improvement in recurrence-free survival. The trial has provoked a discussion on the horizon of expectations from adjuvant treatment and the clinical relevance of efficacy endpoints. Moreover, major pathological responses reported from early phase 2 data in the neoadjuvant setting provide a strong rationale for the evaluation of these concepts in phase 3 trials. In this review, we summarize current evidence and outline future directions for systemic therapies in early-stage HCC.

15.
Can J Surg ; 66(6): E561-E571, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38016726

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Advanced donor age paired with donation after cardiac death (DCD) increases the risk of transplantation, precluding widespread use of grafts from such donors worldwide. Our aim was to analyze outcomes of liver transplantation using grafts from older DCD donors and donation after brain death (DBD) donors. METHODS: Patients who underwent liver transplantation using grafts from deceased donors between January 2016 and December 2021 were included in the study. Short-and long-term outcomes were analyzed for 4 groups of patients: those who received DCD and DBD grafts from younger (< 50 yr) and older (≥ 50 yr) donors. RESULTS: Of the 807 patients included in the analysis, 44.7% (n = 361) of grafts were received from older donors, with grafts for older DCD donors comprising 4.7% of the total cohort (n = 38). Patients who received grafts from older donors had a lower incidence of biliary strictures than those who received grafts from younger donors (7.9% v. 20.0% for DCD donation, p = 0.14, and 4.9% v. 6.8% for DBD donation, p = 0.34), with a significantly lower incidence of ischemic-type biliary strictures in patients who received grafts from older versus younger DCD donors (2.6% v. 18.0%, p = 0.04). There was no difference in 1- and 3-year graft survival rates among patients who received grafts from older and younger DCD donors (92.1% v. 90.8% and 80.2% v. 80.9%, respectively) and those who received grafts from older and younger DBD donors (90.1% v. 93.2% and 85.3% v. 84.4%, respectively) (p = 0.85). Pretransplantation admission to the intensive care unit (hazard ratio [HR] 9.041, p < 0.001) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (HR 2.197, p = 0.02) were found to significantly affect survival of grafts from older donors. CONCLUSION: Donor age alone should not be the criterion to determine the acceptability of grafts in liver transplantation. With careful selection criteria, older DCD donors could make a valuable contribution to expanding the liver donor pool, with grafts that produce comparable results to those obtained with standard-criteria grafts.


Subject(s)
Liver Transplantation , Tissue and Organ Procurement , Humans , Constriction, Pathologic , Retrospective Studies , Living Donors , Tissue Donors , Death , Brain Death
16.
Transpl Int ; 36: 11648, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37779513

ABSTRACT

Liver transplantation offers the best chance of cure for most patients with non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although not all patients with HCC are eligible for liver transplantation at diagnosis, some can be downstaged using locoregional treatments such as ablation and transarterial chemoembolization. These aforementioned treatments are being applied as bridging therapies to keep patients within transplant criteria and to avoid them from dropping out of the waiting list while awaiting a liver transplant. Moreover, immunotherapy might have great potential to support downstaging and bridging therapies. To address the contemporary status of downstaging, bridging, and immunotherapy in liver transplantation for HCC, European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) convened a dedicated working group comprised of experts in the treatment of HCC to review literature and to develop guidelines pertaining to this cause that were subsequently discussed and voted during the Transplant Learning Journey (TLJ) 3.0 Consensus Conference that took place in person in Prague. The findings and recommendations of the working group on Downstaging, Bridging and Immunotherapy in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma are presented in this article.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Chemoembolization, Therapeutic , Liver Neoplasms , Liver Transplantation , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/surgery , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/surgery , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Liver Transplantation/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Chemoembolization, Therapeutic/adverse effects , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , Neoplasm Staging , Immunotherapy
17.
Surgery ; 174(6): 1393-1400, 2023 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37863687

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Hepatectomy , Laparoscopy , Adult , Humans , Hepatectomy/adverse effects , Benchmarking , Retrospective Studies , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , North America/epidemiology , Liver
18.
Ann Surg Open ; 4(3): e328, 2023 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37746604

ABSTRACT

Objective: To conduct a systematic review, critical appraisal, and external validation of survival prediction tools for patients undergoing intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) resection. Summary background data: Despite the development of several survival prediction tools in recent years for patients undergoing iCCA resections, there is a lack of critical appraisal and external validation of these models. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and critical appraisal of survival and recurrence prediction models for patients undergoing curative-intent iCCA resections. Studies were evaluated based on their model design, risk of bias, reporting, performance, and validation results. We identified the best model and externally validated it using our institution's data. Results: This review included a total of 31 studies, consisting of 26 studies with original prediction tools and 5 studies that only conducted external validations. Among the 26, 54% of the studies conducted internal validations, 46% conducted external validations, and only 1 study scored a low risk of bias. Harrell's C-statistics ranged from 0.67 to 0.76 for internal validation and from 0.64 to 0.75 for external validation. Only 81% of the studies reported model calibration. Our external validation of the best model (Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma [ICC]-Metroticket) estimated Harrell's and Uno's C-statistics of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56-0.77) and Uno's time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.53-0.88), with a Brier score of 0.20 (95% CI: 0.15-0.26) and good calibration plots. Conclusions: Many prediction models have been published in recent years, but their quality remains poor, and minimal methodological quality improvement has been observed. The ICC-Metroticket was selected as the best model (Uno's time-dependent AUC of 0.71) for 5-year overall survival prediction in patients undergoing curative-intent iCCA resection.

19.
Ann Surg ; 278(5): 798-806, 2023 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37477016

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To define benchmark values for adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). BACKGROUND: LDLT utilizes living-donor hemiliver grafts to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist mortality. Although references have been established for donor hepatectomy, no such information exists for recipients to enable conclusive quality and comparative assessments. METHODS: Patients undergoing LDLT were analyzed in 15 high-volume centers (≥10 cases/year) from 3 continents over 5 years (2016-2020), with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Benchmark criteria included a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≤20, no portal vein thrombosis, no previous major abdominal surgery, no renal replacement therapy, no acute liver failure, and no intensive care unit admission. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of all centers' medians. RESULTS: Of 3636 patients, 1864 (51%) qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs, including posttransplant dialysis (≤4%), primary nonfunction (≤0.9%), nonanastomotic strictures (≤0.2%), graft loss (≤7.7%), and redo-liver transplantation (LT) (≤3.6%), at 1-year were below the deceased donor LT benchmarks. Bile leak (≤12.4%), hepatic artery thrombosis (≤5.1%), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI ® ) (≤56) were above the deceased donor LT benchmarks, whereas mortality (≤9.1%) was comparable. The right hemiliver graft, compared with the left, was associated with a lower CCI ® score (34 vs 21, P < 0.001). Preservation of the middle hepatic vein with the right hemiliver graft had no impact neither on the recipient nor on the donor outcome. Asian centers outperformed other centers with CCI ® score (21 vs 47, P < 0.001), graft loss (3.0% vs 6.5%, P = 0.002), and redo-LT rates (1.0% vs 2.5%, P = 0.029). In contrast, non-benchmark low-volume centers displayed inferior outcomes, such as bile leak (15.2%), hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2%), or redo-LT (6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Benchmark LDLT offers a valuable alternative to reduce waitlist mortality. Exchange of expertise, public awareness, and centralization policy are, however, mandatory to achieve benchmark outcomes worldwide.


Subject(s)
End Stage Liver Disease , Liver Diseases , Liver Transplantation , Thrombosis , Adult , Humans , Living Donors , Benchmarking , End Stage Liver Disease/surgery , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Liver Diseases/complications , Graft Survival
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...