Analysis of the Predictive Ability for Graft Loss and Mortality of Two Criteria for Early Allograft Dysfunction After Liver Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: The current imbalance between available donors and potential recipients for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has led to a liberalization of organ acceptance criteria, increasing the risk of post-transplant complications such as early allograft dysfunction (EAD). Consequently, we need accurate criteria to detect patients with early poor graft function to guide the strategies of management. We evaluated the usefulness of two frequently used criteria: the definition from Olthoff et al and the Model for Early Allograft Function (MEAF) scoring. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Unicentric cohort study of patients undergoing OLT between January 1, 2010, and November 20, 2016. We performed a univariate study to detect donor, recipient, and transplant factors favoring EAD, defined both by Olthoff criteria and a MEAF score higher than 7. Finally, we developed a comparative survival analysis for cases having or not EAD. RESULTS: In all, 201 transplants met inclusion criteria. According to the stated cutoff for MEAF score, the frequency of EAD was 9.3%, with a significant association to low recipient body mass index and prolonged total graft ischemia time, resulting in lower patient 3-month postoperative survival. According to Olthoff criteria, EAD incidence was 22.1% and was associated with younger donor and recipient ages and higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease and Child-Pugh recipient scores. Its development resulted in lower graft and recipient survival at 3 months after OLT. CONCLUSION: MEAF score and Olthoff criteria are useful tools for detection of EAD. The latter could select more appropriately patients at risk, but its calculation cannot be done until the seventh day after OLT, unlike MEAF score, available on third day.

Prevalence of comorbidities and the prognostic value of the PROFUND index in a hospital cardiology unit. / Prevalencia de pluripatología y valor pronóstico del índice PROFUND en una unidad de hospitalización de Cardiología.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to understand the prevalence of comorbidities and the usefulness of the PROFUND index for the prognostic stratification of patients with comorbidities in a hospital cardiology unit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We consecutively analysed all patients hospitalized in 2012 in the department of cardiology. We recorded the comorbidities, length of stay, hospital mortality, Charlson indices and PROFUND indices. In the patients with comorbidities, we also recorded the readmissions and mortality during a 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 1,033 patients (mean age, 67±13.1 years; 35% women), 381 (36.9%) of whom had comorbidities, with a mean Charlson index of 6.4±1.7 and a mean PROFUND index of 2.5±2.5. Compared with the other patients, the patients with comorbidities were older (72 vs. 64 years, p<.001), had a higher mortality rate (2.9% vs. 1.1%, p=.046) and longer hospital stays (8±5.5 vs. 6±5.7 days, p<.001) and were more often admitted for heart failure (42.3% vs. 15.8%, p<.001). The PROFUND index was independently associated with overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01-1.27; p=.034) and with the presence of major adverse events during the 12-month follow-up (HR, 1.09; 95% CI: 1.01-1.18; p=.026). CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of patients hospitalized in the department of cardiology had comorbidities. These patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, longer stays and greater hospital mortality. The PROFUND index independently predicted mortality and adverse events during the follow-up.

Use of mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplantation: Andalusian Liver Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of various immunosuppressant regimens using mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, observational, multicenter study of 226 patients undergoing liver transplantation was carried out in 2005-2006, with 24-month follow-up. Studied variables were as follows: indicators of kidney, liver, and blood function; intercurrent infections; cardiovascular risk; acute and chronic episodes of rejection; recurrent hepatitis C virus infection; de novo tumors; and survival. Patients were classified into 4 groups according to treatment: no MMF (group 1, n = 91); MMF from induction (group 2, n = 83); late administration of MMF (group 3, n = 30); and MMF at induction, with early withdrawal (group 4, n = 22). RESULTS: Biodemographic characteristics were similar in all 4 groups. The MMF groups were at higher risk and had worse Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Child-Pugh scores and worse pretransplantation blood and kidney function values. Significant differences were observed in creatinine concentration between groups 2 and 3: 0.45 mg/dL at 1 month (P < .01), 0.27 mg/dL at 3 months (P < .01), and 0.3 mg/dL at 6 months (P < .05). In contrast, differences of 0.34 mg/dL (P < .01) were observed between groups 1 and 3 at 1 month and 0.17 mg/dL (P < .05) between groups 1 and 2 at 3 months. No differences were noted in white blood cell counts, episodes of acute rejection (19%) and chronic rejection (5%), graft survival (80%), and rate of recurrent hepatitis C virus infection (75%) between the 4 groups. The infection rate at 3 months in groups 2 and 4 was 34.5%, and in groups 1 and 3 was 34.5% (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Use of MMF at induction and introduction of MMF in the first 3 months posttransplantation helps to preserve and restore creatinine levels in patients with worsened kidney function, and aids in keeping them stable, without increasing the risk of rejection while optimizing the anticalcineurin dosage.