Quality measures in pre-liver transplant care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.

The liver frailty index is a predictor of healthcare utilization after liver transplantation in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have higher healthcare utilization after liver transplantation (LT), yet objective risk stratification tools in this population are lacking. We evaluated the Liver Frailty Index (LFI) as one potential tool. METHODS: Ambulatory LT candidates ≥65 years without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent LT from 1/2012 to 6/2022 at 8 U.S. centers were included. Estimates of the difference in median using quantile regression were used to assess the adjusted association between LFI and hospitalized days within 90 days post-LT. RESULTS: Of 131 LT recipients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) (1st -3rd quartiles) age was 68 years (66-70); median pre-LT MELD-Na was 19 (15-24). Median LFI was 4.1 (3.6-4.7); 27% were frail (LFI≥4.5). Median hospitalized days within 90 days post-LT was 11 (7-20). Compared with non-frail patients, frail patients were hospitalized for a median of 5 days longer post-LT (95% CI .30-9.7, p = .04). Each .5 unit increase in pre-LT LFI was associated with an increase of 1.16 days (95%CI .42-2.69, p = .02) in hospitalized days post-LT. CONCLUSION: Among older adults undergoing LT, frailty was associated with more hospitalized days within 90 days after LT. The LFI can identify older adults who might benefit from pre-LT or early post-LT programs which may reduce post-LT healthcare utilization, such as early rehabilitation or post-hospital discharge programs.

Outcomes and Resource Utilization in Liver Transplant Recipients Who Underwent Expedited Transplant Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Expedited liver transplant evaluations of critically ill patients can be challenging due to limited time for data gathering and psychosocial evaluation. AIMS: To compare clinical outcomes between expedited and traditional transplant evaluation patients and assess for differences in outpatient resource utilization and staff burden between groups. DESIGN: Adult liver transplant recipients who underwent transplant from 2015 to 2019 were included. Expedited evaluation was defined as time from initiating transplant evaluation to transplant listing <2 weeks. Primary outcomes included rates of graft rejection, graft failure, and death within 1-year posttransplant. Secondary outcomes included number of acute care visits, office visits, and medical record documentation made by transplant staff within 1-year posttransplant. Outcomes were compared using Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of the 335 patients included, 92 (27.5%) were expedited and 243 (72.5%) were traditional. Expedited patients were significantly younger, had greater MELD scores, and required more inpatient care and life support at time of transplant. There was no significant difference in risk of graft rejection (HR 1.3, P = .4), graft failure (HR 1.3, P = .6), or mortality (HR 1.0, P = .9) between groups. Expedited transplant was not associated with increased healthcare or staff utilization: acute care visits (rate ratio 0.9, P = .7), office visits (ß = -1.05, P = .2), and medical record documentation (ß = 3.4, P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Despite being more critically ill, patients requiring expedited transplant evaluation have favorable outcomes after transplant and do not require more intensive staff time and resources compared to traditional candidates.

Association of Frailty With Health-Related Quality of Life in Liver Transplant Recipients.

Importance: Frailty has been recognized as a risk factor for mortality after liver transplant (LT) but little is known of its association with functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQL), termed global functional health, in LT recipients. Objective: To evaluate the association between pre-LT and post-LT frailty with post-LT global functional health. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted at 8 US LT centers and included adults who underwent LT from October 2016 to February 2020. Exposures: Frail was defined by a pre-LT Liver Frailty Index (LFI) score of 4.5 or greater. Main Outcomes and Measures: Global functional health at 1 year after LT, assessed using surveys (Short Form-36 [SF-36; summarized by physical component scores (PFC) and mental component summary scores (MCS)], Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale) and performance-based tests (LFI, Fried Frailty Phenotype, and Short Physical Performance Battery). Results: Of 358 LT recipients (median [IQR] age, 60 [53-65] years; 115 women [32%]; 25 [7%] Asian/Pacific Islander, 21 [6%] Black, 54 [15%] Hispanic White, and 243 [68%] non-Hispanic White individuals), 68 (19%) had frailty pre-LT. At 1 year post-LT, the median (IQR) PCS was lower in recipients who had frailty vs those without frailty pre-LT (42 [31-53] vs 50 [38-56]; P = .002), but the median MCS was similar. In multivariable regression, pre-LT frailty was associated with a -5.3-unit lower post-LT PCS (P < .001), but not MCS. The proportion who had difficulty with 1 or more Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (21% vs 10%) or who were unemployed/receiving disability (38% vs 29%) was higher in recipients with vs without frailty. In a subgroup of 210 recipients with LFI assessments 1 year post-LT, 13% had frailty at 1 year post-LT. Recipients who had frailty post-LT reported lower adjusted SF-36-PCS scores (coefficient, -11.4; P < .001) but not SF-36-MCS scores. Recipients of LT who had frailty vs those without frailty 1 year post-LT also had worse median (IQR) Fried Frailty Phenotype scores (1 [1-2] vs 1 [0-1]) and higher rates of functional impairment by a Short Physical Performance Battery of 9 or less (42% vs 20%; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, pre-LT frailty was associated with worse global functional health 1 year after LT. The presence of frailty after LT was also associated with worse HRQL in physical, but not mental, subdomains. These data suggest that interventions and therapeutics that target frailty that are administered before and/or early post-LT may help to improve the health and well-being of LT recipients.

Patient-centered care: Key elements applicable to chronic liver disease.

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is a progressive illness with high symptom burden and functional and cognitive impairment, often with comorbid mental and substance use disorders. These factors lead to significant deterioration in quality of life, with immense burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare. The current healthcare system in the United States does not adequately meet the needs of patients with CLD or control costs given the episodic, reactive, and fee-for-service structure. There is also a need for clinical and financial accountability for CLD care. In this context, we describe the key elements required to shift the CLD care paradigm to a patient-centered and value-based system built upon the Porter model of value-based health care. The key elements include (1) organization into integrated practice units, (2) measuring and incorporating meaningful patient-reported outcomes, (3) enabling technology to allow innovation, (4) bundled care payments, (5) integrating palliative care within routine care, and (6) formalizing centers of excellence. These elements have been shown to improve outcomes, reduce costs, and improve overall patient experience for other chronic illnesses and should have similar benefits for CLD. Payers need to partner with providers and systems to build upon these elements and help align reimbursements with patients' values and outcomes. The national organizations such as the American Association for Study of Liver Diseases need to guide key stakeholders in standardizing these elements to optimize patient-centered care for CLD.

Interhospital transfers resulting in liver transplantation: Clinical, regulatory, and economic issues.

Content available: Audio Recording.

Loneliness in adults awaiting liver transplantation at 7 U.S. transplant centers.

INTRODUCTION: Loneliness, "a subjective feeling of being isolated", is a strong predictor of adverse health. We characterized loneliness in patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) awaiting liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: We surveyed loneliness in ambulatory ESLD adults awaiting LT at 7 U.S. sites using the validated UCLA Three-Item Loneliness Scale, May2020-Jan2021; "lonely"=total ≥5. Liver Frailty Index (LFI) assessed frailty; "frail"=LFI≥4.4. Logistic regression associated loneliness and co-variables. RESULTS: Of 454 participants, median MELDNa was 14 (IQR 10-19) and 26% met criteria for "lonely". Compared to those not lonely, those lonely were younger (57 v. 61y), more likely to be female (48% v. 31%) or frail (21 v. 11%), and less likely to be working (15% v. 26%) or in a committed partnership (52% v. 71%). After multivariable adjustment, frailty (OR=2.24, 95%CI=1.23-4.08), younger age (OR=1.19, 95%CI=1.07-1.34), female sex (OR=1.83, 95%CI=1.14-2.92), not working (OR=2.16, 95%CI=1.16-4.03), and not in a committed partnership (OR=2.07, 95%CI=1.29-3.32) remained significantly associated with higher odds of loneliness. CONCLUSION: Loneliness is prevalent in adults awaiting LT, and independently associated with younger age, female sex and physical frailty. These data lay the foundation to investigate the extent to which loneliness impacts health outcomes in LT, as in the general population. Clinical Trial Registry Website: https://clinicaltrials.gov Trial Number: NCT03228290.

Palliative Care Always: Hepatology-Virtual Primary Palliative Care Training for Hepatologists.

Palliative care (PC) benefits patients with serious illness including end-stage liver disease (ESLD). As part of a cluster randomized trial, hepatologists were trained to deliver primary palliative care to patients with ESLD using an online course, Palliative Care Always: Hepatology (PCA:Hep). Here we present a multimethod formative evaluation (feasibility, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, and practice patterns) of PCA:Hep. Feasibility was measured by completion of coursework and achieving a course grade of >80%. Knowledge acquisition was measured through assessments before and throughout the course. Pre/post-course surveys were conducted to determine self-efficacy and practice patterns. The hepatologists (n = 39) enrolled in a 12-week online course and spent 1-3 hours on the course weekly. The course was determined to be feasible as 97% successfully completed the course and 100% passed. The course was acceptable to participants; 91.7 % reported a positive course experience and satisfaction with knowledge gained (91.6%). The pre/post knowledge assessment showed an improvement of 6.0% (pre 85.9% to post 91.9%, 95% CI [2.8, 9.2], P = 0.001). Self-efficacy increased significantly (P < 0.001) in psychological symptom management, hospice, and psychosocial support. A year after training, over 80% of the hepatologists reported integrating a variety of PC skills into routine patient care. Conclusion: PCA:Hep is feasible, acceptable, and improves learner knowledge and confidence in palliative care skills. This is a viable method to teach primary PC skills to specialists caring for patients with ESLD.

Frailty and the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury Among Patients With Cirrhosis.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and frailty are major drivers of outcomes among patients with cirrhosis. What is unknown is the impact of physical frailty on the development of AKI. We included adults with cirrhosis without hepatocellular carcinoma listed for liver transplantation at nine US centers (n = 1,033). Frailty was assessed using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI); "frail" was defined by LFI ≥ 4.2. Chronic kidney disease as a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 . Our primary outcome, AKI, was defined as an increase in serum creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL or a serum creatinine ≥1.5-fold increase. Wait-list mortality was defined as either a death on the wait list or removal for being too sick. We performed Cox regression analyses to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for AKI and wait-list mortality. Of 1,033 participants, 41% were frail and 23% had CKD. Twenty-one percent had an episode of AKI during follow-up. Frail versus nonfrail patients were more likely to develop AKI (25% vs. 19%) and wait-list mortality (21% vs. 13%) (P < 0.01 for each). In multivariable Cox regression, each of the following groups was associated with a higher risk of AKI as compared with not frail/no CKD: frail/no CKD (adjusted HR [aHR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.29-2.72); not frail/CKD (aHR = 4.30, CI = 2.88-6.42); and frail/CKD (aHR = 4.85, CI = 3.33-7.07). We use a readily available metric, LFI, to identify those patients with cirrhosis most at risk for AKI. We highlight that serum creatinine and creatinine-based estimations of glomerular filtration rate may not fully capture a patient's vulnerability to AKI among the frail phenotype. Conclusion: Our work lays the foundation for implementing physical frailty in clinical practice to identify AKI earlier, implement reno-protective strategies, and expedite liver transplantation.

Cognitive Impairment and Physical Frailty in Patients With Cirrhosis.

Physical frailty and impaired cognition are common in patients with cirrhosis. Physical frailty can be assessed using performance-based tests, but the extent to which impaired cognition may impact performance is not well characterized. We assessed the relationship between impaired cognition and physical frailty in patients with cirrhosis. We enrolled 1,623 ambulatory adult patients with cirrhosis waiting for liver transplantation at 10 sites. Frailty was assessed with the liver frailty index (LFI; "frail," LFI ≥ 4.4). Cognition was assessed at the same visit with the number connection test (NCT); continuous "impaired cognition" was examined in primary analysis, with longer NCT (more seconds) indicating worse impaired cognition. For descriptive statistics, "impaired cognition" was NCT ≥ 45 seconds. Linear regression associated frailty and impaired cognition; competing risk regression estimated subhazard ratios (sHRs) of wait-list mortality (i.e., death/delisting for sickness). Median NCT was 41 seconds, and 42% had impaired cognition. Median LFI (4.2 vs. 3.8) and rates of frailty (38% vs. 20%) differed between those with and without impaired cognition. In adjusted analysis, every 10-second NCT increase associated with a 0.08-LFI increase (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.10). In univariable analysis, both frailty (sHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43-1.87) and impaired cognition (sHR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) associated with wait-list mortality. After adjustment, frailty but not impaired cognition remained significantly associated with wait-list mortality (sHR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.33-1.79). Impaired cognition mediated 7.4% (95% CI, 2.0%-16.4%) of the total effect of frailty on 1-year wait-list mortality. Conclusion: Patients with cirrhosis with higher impaired cognition displayed higher rates of physical frailty, yet frailty independently associated with wait-list mortality while impaired cognition did not. Our data provide evidence for using the LFI to understand mortality risk in patients with cirrhosis, even when concurrent impaired cognition varies.

Acute Liver Injury in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence and significance of acute liver injury in patients with COVID-19 are poorly characterized. METHODS: Patients with confirmed COVID-19 who were hospitalized in geographically diverse medical centers in North America were included. Demographics, symptoms, laboratory data results, and outcomes were recorded. Linear and logistic regression identified factors associated with liver injury, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Among 1555 patients in the cohort, most (74%) had an elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) during hospitalization, which was very severe (> 20 × upper limit of normal [ULN]) in 3%. Severe acute liver injury (ALI) was uncommon, occurring in 0.1% on admission and 2% during hospitalization. No patient developed acute liver failure (ALF). Higher ALT was associated with leukocytosis (per mL3) (ß 10.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.7-12.6, p < 0.001) and vasopressors use (ß 80.2, 95%CI 21.5-138.8, p = 0.007). In-hospital mortality was associated with ALT > 20 × ULN (unadjusted OR 6.0, 95%CI 3.1-11.5, p < 0.001), ALP > 3 × ULN (unadjusted OR 4.4, 95%CI 2.5-7.7, p < 0.001), and severe ALI (unadjusted OR 6.8, 95%CI 3.0-15.3, p < 0.001) but lost significance after adjusting for covariates related to severe COVID-19 and hemodynamic instability. Elevated ALP and ALT were associated with longer LOS, admission to intensive care, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Transaminase elevation is common in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Severe ALI is rare, and ALF may not be a complication of COVID-19. Extreme elevations in liver enzymes appear to be associated with mortality and longer LOS due to more severe systemic disease rather than SARS-CoV-2-related hepatitis.

Quality measures in HCC care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The burden of HCC is substantial. To address gaps in HCC care, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) aimed to develop a standard set of process-based measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) along the HCC care continuum. We identified candidate process and outcomes measures for HCC care based on structured literature review. A 13-member panel with content expertise across the HCC care continuum evaluated candidate measures on importance and performance gap using a modified Delphi approach (two rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Candidate PROs based on a structured scoping review were ranked by 74 patients with HCC across 7 diverse institutions. Out of 135 measures, 29 measures made the final set. These covered surveillance (6 measures), diagnosis (6 measures), staging (2 measures), treatment (10 measures), and outcomes (5 measures). Examples included the use of ultrasound (± alpha-fetoprotein [AFP]) every 6 months, need for surveillance in high-risk populations, diagnostic testing for patients with a new AFP elevation, multidisciplinary liver tumor board (MLTB) review of Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System 4 lesions, standard evaluation at diagnosis, treatment recommendations based on Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging, MLTB discussion of treatment options, appropriate referral for evaluation of liver transplantation candidacy, and role of palliative therapy. PROs include those related to pain, anxiety, fear of treatment, and uncertainty about the best individual treatment and the future. The AASLD PMC has developed a set of explicit quality measures in HCC care to help bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and measurable processes and outcomes. Measurement and subsequent implementation of these metrics could be a central step in the improvement of patient care and outcomes in this high-risk population.

Frailty, mortality, and health care utilization after liver transplantation: From the Multicenter Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Frailty is a well-established risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), but whether it predicts outcomes among those who have undergone LT is unknown. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult LT recipients from 8 US centers (2012-2019) were included. Pre-LT frailty was assessed in the ambulatory setting using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI). "Frail" was defined by an optimal cut point of LFI ≥ 4.5. We used the 75th percentile to define "prolonged" post-LT length of stay (LOS; ≥12 days), intensive care unit (ICU) days (≥4 days), and inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (≥17 days). Of 1166 LT recipients, 21% were frail pre-LT. Cumulative incidence of death at 1 and 5 years was 6% and 16% for frail and 4% and 10% for nonfrail patients (overall log-rank p = 0.02). Pre-LT frailty was associated with an unadjusted 62% increased risk of post-LT mortality (95% CI, 1.08-2.44); after adjustment for body mass index, HCC, donor age, and donation after cardiac death status, the HR was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.39-3.26). Patients who were frail versus nonfrail experienced a higher adjusted odds of prolonged LT LOS (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.47-2.73), ICU stay (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14), inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.25-2.37), and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.58-3.97). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with nonfrail patients, frail LT recipients had a higher risk of post-LT death and greater post-LT health care utilization, although overall post-LT survival was acceptable. These data lay the foundation to investigate whether targeting pre-LT frailty will improve post-LT outcomes and reduce resource utilization.

The clinical value of angiopoietin-2 in liver diseases.

Content available: Audio Recording.