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

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.

Management of Established Small-for-size Syndrome in Post Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Medical, Radiological, and Surgical Interventions: Guidelines From the ILTS-iLDLT-LTSI Consensus Conference.

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) following living donor liver transplantation is a complication that can lead to devastating outcomes such as prolonged poor graft function and possibly graft loss. Because of the concern about the syndrome, some transplants of mismatched grafts may not be performed. Portal hyperperfusion of a small graft and hyperdynamic splanchnic circulation are recognized as main pathogenic factors for the syndrome. Management of established SFSS is guided by the severity of the presentation with the initial focus on pharmacological therapy to modulate portal flow and provide supportive care to the patient with the goal of facilitating graft regeneration and recovery. When medical management fails or condition progresses with impending dysfunction or even liver failure, interventional radiology (IR) and/or surgical interventions to reduce portal overperfusion should be considered. Although most patients have good outcomes with medical, IR, and/or surgical management that allow graft regeneration, the risk of graft loss increases dramatically in the setting of bilirubin >10 mg/dL and INR>1.6 on postoperative day 7 or isolated bilirubin >20 mg/dL on postoperative day 14. Retransplantation should be considered based on the overall clinical situation and the above postoperative laboratory parameters. The following recommendations focus on medical and IR/surgical management of SFSS as well as considerations and timing of retransplantation when other therapies fail.

Toronto Management of Initially Unresectable Liver Metastasis from Colorectal Cancer in a Living Donor Liver Transplant Program.

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an attractive option for patients with unresectable, bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). However, it is not available in most centers beyond study protocols. This study describes the interim experience with LDLT for CRLM at a large North American transplant and hepatobiliary center. f. STUDY DESIGN: Adults with unresectable CRLM, receiving systemic chemotherapy, were recruited into a prospective clinical trial. Data on demographics, referral patterns, and clinical characteristics were extracted from October 2016 to February 2023. Patients were divided into 3 groups: transplanted, resected, and control (excluded with continuation of systemic chemotherapy). Overall survival and recurrence-free survival were compared. RESULTS: Eighty-one referred patients were assessed for LDLT: 7 received transplants, 22 underwent resection, and 48 were controls. All had similar preassessment baseline characteristics. Median time from initial assessment to transplantation was 15.4 months. The control population had significantly worse postassessment overall survival than the transplanted population (p = 0.002) and resected population (p < 0.001). The median postoperative follow-up duration was 21.4 months (resection) and 14.8 months (LDLT). There was no difference in overall survival between the transplanted and resected populations (1-year 100% vs 93.8%; 3-year 100% vs 43.3%, p = 0.17). However, recurrence-free survival was superior in the LDLT group (1-year 85.7% vs 11.4%; 3-year 68.6% vs 11.4%, p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with unresectable CRLM referred for LDLT are deemed ineligible for trial inclusion. However, the excellent oncologic outcomes in patients who meet criteria for LDLT supports its role in highly selected populations. Future results after the trial's completion will inform long-term outcomes.

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.

Right Lobe Versus Left Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Donor and Recipient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an established treatment for advanced liver disease. Whether right lobe (RL) or left lobe (LL) LDLT provides the best outcomes for donors and recipients remains contentious. METHODS: MedLine, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central were searched to identify studies comparing RL- and LL-LDLT and reporting donor and/or recipient outcomes. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were used to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS: Sixty-seven studies were included. RL donors were more likely to experience major complications (relative risk [RR] = 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30-2.05; I2 = 19%) than LL donors; however, no difference was observed in the risk of any biliary complication (RR = 1.41; 95% CI = 0.91-2.20; I2 = 59%), bile leaks (RR = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.97-2.51; I2 = 52%), biliary strictures (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.43-1.88; I2 = 27%), or postoperative death (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.25-1.05; I2 = 0%). Among recipients, the incidence of major complications (RR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.68-1.06; I2 = 21%), biliary complications (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.91-1.33; I2 = 8%), and vascular complications (RR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.44-1.43; I2 = 0%) was similar. Although the rate of small for size syndrome (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.30-0.74; I2 = 0%) and postoperative deaths (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.44-0.87; I2 = 0%) was lower among RL-LDLT recipients, no differences were observed in long-term graft (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.55-1.38; I2 = 74%) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.60-1.22; I2 = 44%). CONCLUSIONS: LL donors experience fewer complications than RL donors, and LL-LDLT recipients had similar outcomes to RL-LDLT recipients. These findings suggest that LL-LDLT offers the best outcomes for living donors and similar outcomes for recipients when measures are taken to prevent small for size syndrome.

Which recipient pretransplant factors, such as MELD, renal function, sarcopenia, and recent sepsis influence suitability for and outcome after living donor liver transplantation? A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Varied access to deceased donors across the globe has resulted in differential living donor liver transplant (LDLT) practices and lack of consensus over the influence of models for end stage liver disease (MELD), renal function, sarcopenia, or recent infection on short-term outcomes. OBJECTIVES: Consider these risk factors in relation to patient selection and provide recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central. METHODS: PRIMSA systematic review and GRADE. PROSPERO ID: RD42021260809 RESULTS: MELD >25-30 alone is not a contraindication to LDLT, and multiple studies found no increase in short term mortality in high MELD patients. Contributing factors such as muscle mass, acute physiologic assessment and chronic health evaluation score, donor age, graft weight/recipient weight ratio, and inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft influence morbidity and mortality in high MELD patients. Higher mortality is observed with pretransplant renal dysfunction, but short-term mortality is rare. Sarcopenia and recent infection are not contraindications to LDLT. Morbidity and prolonged LOS are common, and more frequent in patients with renal dysfunction, nutritional deficiency or recent infection. CONCLUSIONS: When individual risk factors are studied mortality is low and graft loss is infrequent, but morbidity is common. MELD, especially with concomitant risk factors, had the greatest influence on short term outcome, and recent infection had the least. A multidisciplinary team of experts should carefully assess patients with multiple risk factors, and an optimal graft is recommended.

International Survey of Clinical Monitoring Practices in Pancreas and Islet Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The long-term outcomes of both pancreas and islet allotransplantation have been compromised by difficulties in the detection of early graft dysfunction at a time when a clinical intervention can prevent further deterioration and preserve allograft function. The lack of standardized strategies for monitoring pancreas and islet allograft function prompted an international survey established by an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association/European Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association working group. METHODS: A global survey was administered to 24 pancreas and 18 islet programs using Redcap. The survey addressed protocolized and for-cause immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies following pancreas and islet allotransplantation. All invited programs completed the survey. RESULTS: The survey identified that in both pancreas and islet allograft programs, protocolized clinical monitoring practices included assessing body weight, fasting glucose/C-peptide, hemoglobin A1c, and donor-specific antibody. Protocolized monitoring in islet transplant programs relied on the addition of mixed meal tolerance test, continuous glucose monitoring, and autoantibody titers. In the setting of either suspicion for rejection or serially increasing hemoglobin A1c/fasting glucose levels postpancreas transplant, Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography, autoantibody titers, and pancreas graft biopsy were identified as adjunctive strategies to protocolized monitoring studies. No additional assays were identified in the setting of serially increasing hemoglobin A1c levels postislet transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: This international survey identifies common immunologic and metabolic monitoring strategies utilized for protocol and for cause following pancreas and islet transplantation. In the absence of any formal studies to assess the efficacy of immunologic and metabolic testing to detect early allograft dysfunction, it can serve as a guidance document for developing monitoring algorithms following beta-cell replacement.

Superior Long-Term Outcomes of Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Cumulative Single-Center Cohort Study With 20 Years of Follow-Up.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an attractive alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Although both modalities have similar short-term outcomes, long-term outcomes are not well studied. We compared the 20-year outcomes of 668 adults who received LDLT with1596 DDLTs at the largest liver transplantation (LT) program in Canada. Recipients of LDLT were significantly younger and more often male than DDLT recipients (P < 0.001). Autoimmune diseases were more frequent in LDLT, whereas viral hepatitis and alcohol-related liver disease were more frequent in DDLT. LDLT recipients had lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (P = 0.008), spent less time on the waiting list (P < 0.001), and were less often inpatients at the time of LT (P < 0.001). In a nonadjusted analysis, 1-year, 10-year, and 20-year patient survival rates were significantly higher in LDLT (93%, 74%, and 56%, respectively) versus DDLT (91%, 67%, and 46%, respectively; log-rank P = 0.02) as were graft survival rates LDLT (91%, 67%, and 50%, respectively) versus (90%, 65%, and 44.3%, respectively, for DDLT; log-rank P = 0.31). After multivariable adjustment, LDLT and DDLT were associated with a similar hazard of patient and graft survival. Our data of 20 years of follow-up of LDLT from a single, large Western center demonstrates excellent long-term outcomes for recipients of LDLT.

Early Allograft Dysfunction After Liver Transplantation With Donation After Circulatory Death and Brain Death Grafts: Does the Donor Type Matter?

BACKGROUND: Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) after liver transplantation has been associated with long-term reduced graft and patient survival. METHODS: In this single-center cohort study, we aimed to compare incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in liver transplant recipients who developed EAD. Patients who received donation after circulatory death (DCD) or donation after brain death (DBD) grafts between January 2007 and December 2017 were included. EAD was defined as bilirubin of ≥10 mg/dL (171 µmol/L) or an international normalized ratio of ≥1.6 on postoperative day 7 or transaminases >2000 U\L in the first-week posttransplantation as previously described. RESULTS: In our cohort of 1068 patients, incidence of EAD was 44%. EAD occurred more frequently in the DCD versus DBD group (71% versus 41%, P < 0.01). Overall, recipients who developed EAD showed a significantly lower graft and patient survival at 1, 3, and 5 y after transplantation (all P < 0.05). This was also the case for recipients of DBD grafts. However, for recipients of DCD grafts, patient and graft survival were not affected by the presence of EAD. For recipients of DBD grafts, donor age, body mass index (BMI) and gender, recipient BMI and model for end-stage liver disease score and warm and cold ischemia time were associated with EAD. For DCD recipients, donor BMI and cold ischemia time were associated with EAD. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort study, EAD resulted in reduced long-term patient and graft survival only for DBD recipients but not for DCD recipients. Predictive markers for EAD were dependent on the donor type.

Outcomes of Highly Selected Live Donors With a Future Liver Remnant Less Than or Equal to 30%: A Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The main concern with live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the risk to the donor. Given the potential risk of liver insufficiency, most centers will only accept candidates with future liver remnants (FLR) >30%. We aimed to compare postoperative outcomes of donors who underwent LDLT with FLR ≤30% and >30%. METHODS: Adults who underwent right hepatectomy for LDLT between 2000 and 2018 were analyzed. Remnant liver volumes were estimated using hepatic volumetry. To adjust for between-group differences, donors with FLR ≤30% and >30% were matched 1:2 based on baseline characteristics. Postoperative complications including liver dysfunction were compared between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 604 live donors were identified, 28 (4.6%) of whom had a FLR ≤30%. Twenty-eight cases were successfully matched with 56 controls; the matched cohorts were mostly similar in terms of donor and graft characteristics. The calculated median FLR was 29.8 (range, 28.0-30.0) and 35.2 (range, 30.1-68.1) in each respective group. Median follow-up was 36.5 mo (interquartile range, 11.8-66.1). Postoperative outcomes were similar between groups. No difference was observed in overall complication rates (FLR ≤30%: 32.1% versus FLR >30%: 28.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-3.27) or major complication rates (FLR ≤30%: 14.3% versus FLR >30%: 14.3%; OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.33-4.10). Posthepatectomy liver failure was rare, and no difference was observed (FLR ≤30%: 3.6% versus FLR >30%: 3.6%; OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.11-11.1). CONCLUSION: A calculated FLR between 28% and 30% on its own should not represent a formal contraindication for live donation.

Pancreas-specific SNAP23 depletion prevents pancreatitis by attenuating pathological basolateral exocytosis and formation of trypsin-activating autolysosomes.

Intrapancreatic trypsin activation by dysregulated macroautophagy/autophagy and pathological exocytosis of zymogen granules (ZGs), along with activation of inhibitor of NFKB/NF-κB kinase (IKK) are necessary early cellular events in pancreatitis. How these three pancreatitis events are linked is unclear. We investigated how SNAP23 orchestrates these events leading to pancreatic acinar injury. SNAP23 depletion was by knockdown (SNAP23-KD) effected by adenovirus-shRNA (Ad-SNAP23-shRNA/mCherry) treatment of rodent and human pancreatic slices and in vivo by infusion into rat pancreatic duct. In vitro pancreatitis induction by supraphysiological cholecystokinin (CCK) or ethanol plus low-dose CCK were used to assess SNAP23-KD effects on exocytosis and autophagy. Pancreatitis stimuli resulted in SNAP23 translocation from its native location at the plasma membrane to autophagosomes, where SNAP23 would bind and regulate STX17 (syntaxin17) SNARE complex-mediated autophagosome-lysosome fusion. This SNAP23 relocation was attributed to IKBKB/IKKß-mediated SNAP23 phosphorylation at Ser95 Ser120 in rat and Ser120 in human, which was blocked by IKBKB/IKKß inhibitors, and confirmed by the inability of IKBKB/IKKß phosphorylation-disabled SNAP23 mutant (Ser95A Ser120A) to bind STX17 SNARE complex. SNAP23-KD impaired the assembly of STX4-driven basolateral exocytotic SNARE complex and STX17-driven SNARE complex, causing respective reduction of basolateral exocytosis of ZGs and autolysosome formation, with consequent reduction in trypsinogen activation in both compartments. Consequently, pancreatic SNAP23-KD rats were protected from caerulein and alcoholic pancreatitis. This study revealed the roles of SNAP23 in mediating pathological basolateral exocytosis and IKBKB/IKKß's involvement in autolysosome formation, both where trypsinogen activation would occur to cause pancreatitis. SNAP23 is a strong candidate to target for pancreatitis therapy.Abbreviations: AL: autolysosome; AP: acute pancreatitis; AV: autophagic vacuole; CCK: cholecystokinin; IKBKB/IKKß: inhibitor of nuclear factor kappa B kinase subunit beta; SNAP23: synaptosome associated protein 23; SNARE: soluble NSF (N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor) attachment protein receptor; STX: syntaxin; TAP: trypsinogen activation peptide; VAMP: vesicle associated membrane protein; ZG: zymogen granule.

Renal Dysfunction After Liver Transplantation: Effect of Donor Type.

Recipients of donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts are reportedly at higher risk of developing renal dysfunction after liver transplantation (LT). We compared the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) after LT in recipients of DCD versus donation after brain death (DBD) or living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) livers. Adult recipients of DBD, LDLT, and DCD between 2012 and 2016 at Toronto General Hospital were included. AKI was defined as a post-LT increase of serum creatinine (sCr) ≥26.5 µmol/L within 48 hours or a ≥50% increase from baseline, and CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/minute for >3 months. A total of 681 patients (DCD, n = 57; DBD, n = 446; and LDLT, n = 178) with similar baseline comorbidities were included. Perioperative AKI (within the first 7 postoperative days) was observed more frequently in the DCD group (61%; DBD, 40%; and LDLT, 44%; P = 0.01) and was associated with significantly higher peak AST levels (P < 0.001). Additionally, patients in the DCD group had a significantly higher peak sCr (P < 0.001) and a trend toward higher rates of AKI stage 3 (DCD, 33%; DBD, 21%; LDLT, 21%; P = 0.11). The proportions of recovery from AKI (DCD, 77%; DBD, 72%; LDLT, 78%; P = 0.45) and patients developing CKD (DCD, 33%; DBD, 32%; LDLT, 32%; P = 0.99) were similar. Nevertheless, patients who received DCD or DBD LT and required perioperative renal replacement therapy showed significantly lower patient survival in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 7.90; 95% confidence interval, 4.51-13.83; P < 0.001). In conclusion, recipients of DCD liver grafts experience higher rates of short-term post-LT renal dysfunction compared with DBD or LDLT. Additional risk factors for the development of severe kidney injury, such as high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, massive transfusions, or donor age ≥60 years should be avoided.

Pediatric living donor liver transplantation with large-for-size left lateral segment grafts.

Usage of "large-for-size" left lateral segment (LLS) liver grafts in children with high graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR) is controversial due to concerns about increased recipient complications. During the study period, 77 pediatric living donor liver transplantations (LDLTs) with LLS grafts were performed. We compared recipients with GRWR ≥2.5% (GR-High = 50) vs GRWR <2.5% (GR-Low = 27). Median age was higher in the GR-Low group (40 vs 8 months, P> .0001). Graft (GR-High: 98%, 98%, 98% vs GR-Low: 96%, 93%, 93%) and patient (GR-High: 98%, 98%, 98% vs GR-Low: 100%, 96%, 96%) survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was similar between groups (P = NS). Overall complications were also similar (34% vs 30%; P = .8). Hepatic artery and portal vein thrombosis following transplantation was not different (P = NS). Delayed abdominal fascia closure was more common in GR-High patients (17 vs 1; P = .002). Subgroup analysis comparing recipients with GRWR ≥4% (GR-XL = 20) to GRWR <2.5% (GRWR-Low = 27) revealed that delayed abdominal fascia closure was more common in the GR-XL group, but postoperative complications and graft and patient survival were similar. We conclude that pediatric LDLT with large-for-size LLS grafts is associated with excellent clinical outcomes. There is an increased need for delayed abdominal closure with no compromise of long-term outcomes. The use of high GRWR expands the donor pool and improves timely access to the benefits of transplantation without extra risks.

The Impact of Preexisting and Post-transplant Diabetes Mellitus on Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is said to adversely affect transplant outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of pre-existing and new-onset DM on liver transplantation (LT) recipients. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of LT recipients (1990-2015) was undertaken. RESULTS: Of the 2209 patients, 13% (n = 298) had Pre-DM, 16% (n = 362) developed post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), 5% (n = 118) developed transient hyperglycemia (t-HG) post-LT, and 65% (n = 1431) never developed DM (no DM). Baseline clinical characteristics of patients with PTDM were similar to that of patients with Pre-DM. Incidence of PTDM peaked during the first year (87%) and plateaued thereafter. On multivariate analysis (Bonferroni-corrected), nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and the use of tacrolimus and sirolimus were independently associated with PTDM development. Both Pre-DM and PTDM patients had satisfactory and comparable glycemic control throughout the follow-up period. Those who developed t-HG seem to have a unique characteristic compared with others. Overall, 9%, 5%, and 8% of patients developed end-stage renal disease (ESRD), major cardiovascular event (mCVE), and de novo cancer, respectively. Both Pre-DM and PTDM did not adversely affect patient survival, retransplantation, or de novo cancer. The risks of ESRD and mCVE were significantly higher in patients with Pre-DM followed by PTDM and no DM. CONCLUSIONS: In this largest nonregistry study, patients with Pre-DM and PTDM share similar baseline clinical characteristics. Pre-DM increases the risk of ESRD and mCVE; however, patient survival was comparable to those with PTDM and without diabetes. Understanding the impact of PTDM would need prolonged follow-up.

Passenger Lymphocyte Syndrome After Pediatric Liver Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Passenger lymphocyte syndrome (PLS) is a less known etiology of acute onset anemia following ABO-compatible (ABO-c) liver transplantation (LT). Available literature on PLS after pediatric LT is limited. Therefore, we evaluated the prevalence, clinical course, and risk factors of PLS in children following ABO-c LT. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of all children who underwent LT between 2000 and 2017 was performed. PLS was defined as a drop-in hemoglobin >20 g/L within 30 days of LT, with positive direct antiglobulin test and 1 laboratory test confirming hemolysis. Chi square and student t tests compared variables between subjects with and without PLS. RESULTS: Amongst 333 pediatric LT performed, 51 children received an ABO-c graft. PLS was diagnosed in 7 (14%) subjects at a median of 10 days after LT. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, graft type, or immunosuppression between those who did and did not develop PLS. Recipient blood group A+ receiving a donor O+ graft was a risk factor for PLS (P = 0.015). All PLS subjects recovered with blood transfusions (median 2), and no additional interventions. Three subjects initially received recipient (instead of donor) blood group red cells. CONCLUSIONS: We report a 14% prevalence of PLS following pediatric ABO-c LT. Recipient blood group A+ receiving a donor O+ graft is a risk factor for PLS. Recognition of PLS as a cause of early acute anemia in pediatric ABO-c LT enables timely transfusion with donor (rather than recipient) blood group red cells.

Outcomes of radiofrequency ablation as first-line therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma less than 3 cm in potentially transplantable patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is an effective treatment for single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤3 cm. Disease recurrence is common, and in some patients will occur outside transplant criteria. We aimed to assess the incidence and risk factors for recurrence beyond Milan criteria in potentially transplantable patients treated with RFA as first-line therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of potentially transplantable patients with new diagnoses of unifocal HCC ≤3 cm that underwent RFA as first-line therapy between 2000-2015. We defined potentially transplantable patients as those aged <70 years without any comorbidities that would preclude transplant surgery. Incidence of recurrence beyond Milan criteria was compared across 2 groups according to HCC diameter at the time of ablation: (HCC ≤2 cm vs. HCC >2 cm). Competing risks Cox regression was used to identify predictors of recurrence beyond Milan criteria. RESULTS: We included 301 patients (167 HCC ≤2 cm and 134 HCC >2 cm). Recurrence beyond Milan criteria occurred in 36 (21.6%) and 47 (35.1%) patients in the HCC ≤2 cm and the HCC >2 cm groups, respectively (p = 0.01). The 1-, 3- and 5-year actuarial survival rates after RFA were 98.2%, 86.2% and 79.0% in the HCC ≤2 cm group vs. 93.3%, 77.6% and 70.9% in the HCC >2 cm group (p = 0.01). Tumor size >2 cm (hazard ratio 1.94; 95%CI 1.25-3.02) and alpha-fetoprotein levels at the time of ablation (100-1,000 ng/ml: hazard ratio 2.05; 95%CI 1.10-3.83) were found to be predictors of post-RFA recurrence outside Milan criteria. CONCLUSION: RFA for single HCC ≤3 cm provides excellent short- to medium-term survival. However, we identified patients at higher risk of recurrence beyond Milan criteria. For these patients, liver transplantation should be considered immediately after the first HCC recurrence following RFA. LAY SUMMARY: Radiofrequency ablation and liver transplantation are treatment options for early stages of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). After ablation some patients will experience recurrence or metastatic spread of the initial tumor or may develop new tumors within the liver. Despite close follow-up, these recurrences can progress rapidly and exceed transplant criteria, preventing the patient from receiving a transplant. We identified that patients with HCC >2 cm and higher serum alpha-fetoprotein are at greater risk of recurrence beyond the transplant criteria. These data suggest that liver transplantation should be considered immediately after the first HCC recurrence for these patients.