Nature and outcomes of the increased incidence of colorectal malignancy after liver transplantation in Australasia.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether incidence of colorectal malignancy is increased in Australasian liver transplant recipients compared with the general population of Australia, and to assess the characteristics and outcomes of colorectal malignancy in this patient group. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: Data on patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx) and had a diagnosis of de-novo colorectal malignancy after transplantation during the period 1985-2011 were obtained from the Australia and New Zealand Liver Transplant Registry, and these data were compared with colorectal malignancy data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from OLTx to diagnosis of colorectal malignancy, stage of colorectal malignancy at diagnosis, patient survival, and standardised incidence ratio (SIR) for colorectal malignancy. RESULTS: Forty-eight of 3735 recipients (1.3%) were diagnosed with colorectal malignancy at a median of 7.3 years after OLTx. More advanced colorectal malignancy (regional or metastatic disease) was evident at diagnosis in 20 of the 48 patients; these patients tended to be younger than patients with less advanced malignancy (P = 0.01) and diagnosed sooner after OLTx (P = 0.005). Despite treatment predominantly with surgery, 19 of the 48 patients died from the malignancy. The overall SIR for colorectal malignancy liver transplant recipients compared with the general population of Australia was 2.80 (95% CI, 2.06-3.71). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of colorectal malignancy is increased in liver transplant recipients in comparison with the general population. Of concern is the tendency for advanced malignancy to be diagnosed in younger patients. These data highlight the importance of considering whether specific guidelines for colorectal malignancy screening in the Australasian adult liver transplant population are needed.

Grade of deceased donor liver macrovesicular steatosis impacts graft and recipient outcomes more than the Donor Risk Index.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Donor liver steatosis can impact on liver allograft outcomes. The aim of the present study was to comprehensively report on the impact of type and grade of donor steatosis, as well as donor and recipient factors, including the reported Donor Risk Index (DRI), on liver allograft outcomes. METHODS: A review of unit data for all adult liver transplant procedures from 2001 to 2007, as well as donor offers. Donor liver biopsies were regraded for steatosis by an experienced histopathologist. RESULTS: Steatosis was detected in 184/255 (72%) of biopsies, of which 114 (62%) had microvesicular steatosis (MiS; 68 mild, 22 moderate, 24 severe) and 70 (38%) macrovesicular steatosis (MaS; 59 mild, 7 moderate, 4 severe). The majority (66/70, 94%) of biopsies with MaS also contained MiS. Allograft steatosis was associated with increasing donor body mass index (P = 0.000), plus donor male sex (P < 0.05). Primary non function (P = 0.002), early renal failure (P = 0.040), and requirement for retransplantation (P = 0.012) were associated only with severe MaS. Early biliary complications were associated with moderate MaS (P = 0.039). Only severe MaS was significantly associated with inferior allograft survival at 3 months (relative risk = 12.09 [8.75-19.05], P = 0.000) and 1 year (P = 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: MiS is a common finding and frequently coexists with MaS on liver allograft biopsy, while isolated MaS is uncommon. Only the presence of moderate to severe MaS is associated with inferior early allograft outcomes. The impact of severe MaS on allograft survival appears greater than other donor factors, including the calculated DRI.

Minimal but significant improvement in survival for non-hepatitis C-related adult liver transplant patients beyond the one-year posttransplant mark.

Although 1-year survival rates following liver transplantation over the last 20 years may have improved, there is doubt about improvement in long-term survival. We examined survival with and without initial 12-month mortality in adult liver transplant recipients over a 20-year period. Patient and allograft survival for 3 different time periods was compared: 1986-1994 (group 1, n = 547), 1995-2000 (group 2, n = 735), and 2000-2005 (group 3, n = 749). After this, all deaths in the first 12 months of each group were removed. Patient and allograft survival was then once again compared across the 3 groups. There was significant improvement in both patient and allograft survival across the 20-year period (P < 0.001). Overall patient and allograft survival improved in non-hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients but not in HCV patients. A similar comparison with deaths in the first year removed, however, showed no difference in patient survival (P = 0.07) and only a marginal improvement in allograft survival (P = 0.048) between the 3 time periods. When patients were divided into HCV-positive and HCV-negative groups with deaths in the first year removed, there was, however, improved patient and allograft survival in the HCV-negative group but not in the HCV-positive group. The causes of death between 1 and 5 years were then compared. There were 48 deaths in period 1, 63 in period 2, and 43 in period 3 (P = not significant). There were more deaths due to cardio/cerebrovascular disease and hepatitis B virus recurrence in the first time period, but there were more deaths due to recurrent HCV and de novo malignancy in later time periods. In conclusion, although overall survival following liver transplantation in adults seems to be improving over time, the long-term results are not, particularly in HCV patients.

Arterial vascular conduits in adult orthotopic liver transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Vascular conduits may be required to gain arterial inflow to the donor hepatic artery in orthotopic liver transplantation. METHODS: From January 1986 to December 2003, arterial conduits were required in 31/582 (5.3%) adult liver transplant procedures. RESULTS: Indications for the conduit included recipient hepatic artery problems (20); hepatic artery thrombosis previous allograft (7) and other (4). The conduits used in 28/31 cases (90%) were deceased donor iliac arteries and the remainder prosthetic grafts. Patients requiring conduits were more likely to be already hospitalized (P = 0.038) or undergoing a retransplant procedure (P = 0.001) than patients not requiring conduits. Both sepsis and haemorrhage caused death in 8/31 (26%) patients requiring conduits versus 42/551 (7.6%) patients not requiring conduits. Death from thrombosis of the iliac artery conduit occurred in two cases and from bacterial infection of a prosthetic conduit in one case. For retransplant procedures, allograft loss was seen in 11/13 (84%) conduit cases versus 11/28 (39%) non-conduit cases (P = 0.016). Overall allograft survival was significantly lower in the conduit cases than in the non-conduit cases (P = 0.0001), with 12/31 (39%) allografts being lost within the first 3 months post-transplantation for the conduit cases. CONCLUSION: Arterial vascular conduits are more commonly required in adult liver transplant recipients who are hospitalized or undergoing retransplant procedures. Allograft survival is poorer in the conduit cases and is associated with complications, particularly sepsis and haemorrhage, following retransplantation procedures.