Organ donation and transplantation statistics in Belgium for 2012 and 2013.

BACKGROUND: The 2012 and 2013 solid organ transplantation statistics were presented during the annual meeting of the Belgian Transplant Society. METHODS: All data presented were collected from Eurotransplant International Foundation and/or from all individual Belgian transplant centers. RESULTS: It was demonstrated that the highest number of deceased donors detected (1310) from which 47.8% were an effective organ donor that corresponded to 29 per million inhabitants (pmi) in 2012 and 27.4 pmi in 2013. Out of 626 effective deceased organ donors, 491 (79%) were donors after brain death (DBD) and 135 (21%) donors after circulatory death (DCD), respectively. The majority (125/135; 93%) of DCD donors were DCD Maastricht category III donors and there were 7 (5%) donations following euthanasia. Family refusal tended to be lower for DCD (10.4%) compared to DBD donors (13.4%). Despite the increasing DCD donation rate, DBD donation remains stable in Belgium. The donor age is still increasing, reaching a median age of 53 years (range 0-90). Spontaneous intracranial bleeding (39.3%) and cranio-cerebral trauma (25%) remained the most frequent reasons of death. The number of living related kidney transplantations (57 in 2012 and 63 in 2013) followed the international trend albeit in Belgium it is still very limited. Nevertheless this activity could explain that the number of patients waiting for kidney transplantation (770) reached an absolute minimum in 2013. Except the reduced waiting list for lung transplantation (from 119 patients in 2011 to 85 in 2013), the waiting list remained stable for the other organs but almost 200 patients still died while on the waiting list. CONCLUSIONS: Belgium demonstrated the highest number of effective organ donors that corresponded to 29 per million inhabitants (pmi) in 2012 and 27.4 pmi in 2013. Thus far, and in contrast with other countries, there is no erosion of DBD in the DCD donor organ pool, but it is the important responsibility of all transplant centers and donor hospitals to avoid a substitution from DBD by DCD donors.

Risk factors for bleeding and clinical implications in patients undergoing liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced liver disease is characterized by prolonged global coagulation tests such as prothrombin time (PT). Using Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score-based allocation, many current transplant recipients show advanced end-stage liver disease with an elevated international normalized ratio (INR). The relationship between abnormalities in coagulation tests and the risk of bleeding has been recently challenged among liver disease patients. In this study we reassessed risk factors for bleeding and the clinical implications for patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). METHODS: We studied OLT patients between 2005 and 2011 excluding combined transplantations, retransplantations, or cases due to acute liver failure. We collected prospectively pre-OLT, during OLT, and post-OLT clinical and biochemical data to assess the risk for bleeding using linear regression models. RESULTS: The strongest predictor of overall survival among 286 patients with a mean follow-up of 32 months was the number of blood transfusions (P = .005). The risk factor for bleeding during surgery investigated by multivariate analysis only showed the INR (P < .001) and the presence of ascites (P = .003) to independently correlate with the amount of blood transfusion. Receiver operation characteristics (ROC) analysis performed to determine the risk for massive blood transfusion (more than 6 units) revealed a cut-off value for INR ≥ 1.6. Appreciation of the operative field by the surgeon during the intervention as "wet" versus "dry", amounts of blood transfusion and fresh frozen plasma, and stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in the hospital were all significantly different (P < .001) for patients with INR <1.6 versus INR ≥ 1.6. CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding during OLT affects the outcome. The risk is independently influenced by the presence of ascites (probably reflecting the degree portal hypertension) and an INR ≥ 1.6. To improve survival after OLT therapeutic interventions should be further explored to reduce the need for blood transfusions.

Septuagenarian and octogenarian donors provide excellent liver grafts for transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Wider utilization of liver grafts from donors ≥ 70 years old could substantially expand the organ pool, but their use remains limited by fear of poorer outcomes. We examined the results at our center of liver transplantation (OLT) using livers from donors ≥ 70 years old. METHODS: From February 2003 to August 2010, we performed 450 OLT including 58 (13%) using donors ≥ 70 whose outcomes were compared with those using donors <70 years old. RESULTS: Cerebrovascular causes of death predominated among donors ≥ 70 (85% vs 47% in donors <70; P < .001). In contrast, traumatic causes of death predominated among donors <70 (36% vs 14% in donors ≥ 70; P = .002). Unlike grafts from donors <70 years old, grafts from older individuals had no additional risk factors (steatosis, high sodium, or hemodynamic instability). Both groups were comparable for cold and warm ischemia times. No difference was noted in posttransplant peak transaminases, incidence of primary nonfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, biliary strictures, or retransplantation rates between groups. The 1- and 5-year patient survivals were 88% and 82% in recipients of livers <70 versus 90% and 84% in those from ≥ 70 years old (P = .705). Recipients of older grafts, who were 6 years older than recipients of younger grafts (P < .001), tended to have a lower laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P = .074). CONCLUSIONS: Short and mid-term survival following OLT using donors ≥ 70 yo can be excellent provided that there is adequate donor and recipient selection. Septuagenarians and octogenarians with cerebrovascular ischemic and bleeding accidents represent a large pool of potential donors whose wider use could substantially reduce mortality on the OLT waiting list.

Outcomes of liver transplantations using donations after circulatory death: a single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) (LTx) using donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors is increasingly performed, but still considered to risk of poorer outcomes compared with standard donations after brain death (DBD)-OLT. Therefore we reviewed our results of DCD-OLT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2003 and 2010, we performed 30 DCD-OLT (6% of all OLT). We retrospectively reviewed medical records of donors and recipients after DCD versus DBD-OLT to analyze biliary complications, retransplantation rates, and patient/graft survivals. RESULTS: Median donor age was similar for DCD and DBD-OLT: 51 versus 53 years (P = .244). Median donor warm ischemia time (stop ventilation to cold perfusion in DCD donors) was 24 minutes. Median cold ischemia time was shorter for DCD (6 hours 54 minutes) compared with DBD-OLT (8 hours 36 minutes; P < .0001). Median laboratory model of end-stage liver disease score was 15 for DCD, and 16 for DBD-OLT (P = .59). Median post-OLT Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) peak was higher after DCD: 1178 versus DBD-OLT 651 IU/L (P = .005). The incidence of nonanastomotic strictures was different: 33.3% for DCD versus 12.5% for DBD-OLT (P = .001). The overall retransplantation rate was 3% after both DCD and DBD-OLT. After DCD-LTx actuarial 1, 3- and 5-year patient survivals were 93, 85 and 85%, and corresponding graft survivals, 90%, 82%, and 82% respectively, and not different compared with DBD-OLT: 88%, 78%, and 72% (P = .348) and 85%, 74%, and 68% (P = .524) respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial ischemic injury (high peak AST and biliary strictures) short- and long-term survival after DCD-OLT was comparable to DBD-OLT. Rapid donor surgery, careful donor and recipient selection, as well as short warm and cold ischemia times are key factors to optimize outcomes after DCD-OLT. However, strategies to reduce biliary complications remain warranted.

Biliary strictures after liver transplantation: risk factors and prevention by donor treatment with epoprostenol.

Biliary strictures (BS), a major complication after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), cause morbidity, mortality, graft loss, and increased costs. The virtually unchanged incidence of BS (approximately 10%-25%) suggests that they are not simply "technical" in origin, but probably represent a mucosa ischemic injury inherent in the transplantation procedure. To study risk factors for BS, we analyzed 403 OLTs performed between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2006, at a single center, excluding cases of regraft or death within 1 month. The average time to the diagnosis of the BS was 253 days (range, 7-1002 days). Upon univariate analysis, the absence of flushing of donor bile ducts, an imported versus a locally procured liver, and rejection were risk factors for BS. In contrast, the following factors were protective: donor cardiac arrest followed by resuscitation (suggesting an ischemic preconditioning effect) as well as addition of epoprostenol to and pressurization of the preservation solution. Patients with higher postoperative peak values of transaminases, bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase were at greater risk for later development of BS. Donor hypotension, donor age, donor intensive care unit (ICU) stay, type of preservation, positive cross-match, cold and warm ischemia times, sequential versus simultaneous portal/arterial reperfusion, as well as cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection were not risk factors for BS. Upon multivariate analysis, only epoprostenol and pressurization offered protection from BS. In conclusion, this study 2 novel points: (1) patients with high(er) transaminase values and cholestasis early postoperatively are at greater risk to develop later BS and require close monitoring and (2) donor maneuvers for better flushing and preserving peribiliary vascular plexus and biliary mucosa (epoprostenol and pressurization of preservation solution) offer protection from BS.

Change in donor profile influenced the percentage of organs transplanted from multiple organ donors.

We hypothesized that the change in donor profile over the years influenced the percentage of transplantations. We reviewed medical records for all multiple-organ donors (MODs) within our network. The percentage of transplanted organs was compared between 1991-1992 (A) and 2006-2007 (B). In period A, 156 potential MODs were identified compared with 278 in period B. Fifteen potential donors (10%) in period A and 114 (41%) in period B were rejected because they were medically not suitable (40% vs 75%) or there was no family consent (60% vs 25%). Of the remaining effective MODs (141 in period A and 164 in period B), mean (standard deviation = SD) age was 34 (5) years vs 49 (17) years (P < .001). Brain death resulted from craniocerebral trauma in 69% vs 39%, cerebrovascular disease in 24% vs 46%, hypoxia in 4% vs 15%, and brain tumor in 2% vs 0.6% (P < .001). Chest trauma was present in 19% vs 9% (P < .01). The percentage of MODs who received mechanical ventilation for more than 5 days was 8% vs 24% (P < .001). The percentage of organs transplanted in periods A vs B was kidneys, 97% vs 79%; livers, 64% vs 85%; hearts, 60% vs 26%; lungs, 7% vs 35%; and pancreas, 6% vs 13% (P < .001). The number of referred potential MODs increased by 80%, resulting in a small increase in effective MOD organs (17%), mainly because of medical contraindications. The MOD profile changed to older age, fewer traumatic brain deaths, and longer ventilation time. We transplanted more livers, lungs, and pancreases but fewer kidneys and hearts.

What is the limiting factor for organ procurement in Belgium: donation or detection ? What can be done to improve organ procurement rates?

In trying to overcome the growing gap between demand and offer of organs for transplantation, solutions are usually searched for by comparing successful and unsuccessful models in different countries. In particular, one element in the more successful countries such as for instance presumed consent, or one element in the less successful countries such as for instance refusal by relatives, are seen as possible reasons for these differences. This article tackles the problem of organ donor shortage through a new multi-level approach. Organ donation can indeed be analyzed on three different levels: the macro-level, the meso-level and the micro-level. The macro-level refers to the governmental structure where legislation, policies and funding are three essential elements necessary to make donation possible. The meso-level refers to the health care organization and the professionals who surround the process of organ donation and transplantation. Facilitating this process through standardized protocols and improving detection of organ donors are the two major elements. The micro-level refers to the individual believes and personal attitudes towards organ donation. This new multi-level approach gives a thorough and complete analysis of problems and allows to propose potential solutions to try to overcome the chronic organ shortage.

Abdominal Transplant Surgery and Transplant Coordination University Hospitals Leuven 1997-2007: an overview.

The transplant surgery and transplant coordination department was created in 1997 to meet up with the demand of the growing abdominal transplant surgery and organ procurement activity at the University Hospitals in Leuven. Since then, the procurement activity has increased and is currently distributed within the University Hospital Gasthuisberg and a network of approximately 25 collaborative hospitals. The profile of the donors has changed with older donors and more co-morbidity factors (obesity, hypertension, etc.). This donor activity represents approximately 30% of the national donor pool. Over the last 10 years, more than 1100 kidneys, more than 500 livers, approximately 50 pancreas, and 5 intestines have been transplanted in both adults and children. One year survival equal to- or exceeding 90% has been achieved for all abdominal organs and this compares favorably with international registries. More than 40 multi-visceral transplants {liver in combination with abdominal (kidney, pancreas, intestine) or thoracic (heart, double lung, heart-lung) organs} have been performed with results equivalent to isolated liver transplants and very little immunological graft loss (probably due to the immunoprotective effect of the liver). A live donation program was started for the kidney (40 cases) and for the liver (10 cases) in adults and children and no surgical graft loss has been seen so far. Introduction of new machine perfusion systems (and development of donor protocols) has made it possible to restart a non-heart-beating donor program for kidney transplantation. Experimental demonstration that livers tolerate short periods of warm ischemia has also allowed to start liver transplantation from non-heart-beating donors. In the future, machine perfusion of livers, viability testing, and biological modulation are likely to widen the use of marginal livers for transplantation and improve the results. An immunomodulatory protocol proven in the lab to induce the development of regulatory T cells has been applied clinically to 5 consecutive intestinal transplants. All 5--at the time of writing--have been rejection-free and have achieved nutritional independence. Continuous research and development is warranted to increase the organ donor pool (currently the solely limiting factor of transplantation) and to optimize long-term graft and patient outcome.

Evolution in allocation rules for renal, hepatic, pancreatic and intestinal grafts.

Organ transplantation is the victim of his own success. The results of transplantation are excellent and more patients are activated on the waiting list. The need for organs exceeds the supply. Which criteria are used to allocate available grafts to patients on the waiting list ? Organ allocation and finding the "best match" between donor and recipients, is the goal of Eurotransplant, the organ sharing organization for seven European countries (Austria, Croatia, Germany, Luxemburg, Slovenia, The Netherlands and Belgium). Last decade, the allocation system has switched from a "center-driven" (organ allocated to a center) to a "patient-driven" system (organ allocated to a particular patient). For the allocation of abdominal organs some general allocation rules are followed: blood group compatibility, priority for high urgencies. The allocation of kidneys is based on a point score system based on waiting time, HLA and donor location (to reduce the cold ischemia time). In addition to this standard allocation procedure, there are still specific procedures for pediatric recipients and for candidates > or = 65 year old. There is also an "acceptable" mismatch program for recipients at high immunological risk. The liver allocation system recently changed and is now based on the MELD score, a formula that calculates the probability of death within 3 months on the waiting list. For pancreas and intestine, the system is based on blood group, medical urgency, waiting time, donor region and weight (for intestine).

Donor categories: heart-beating, non-heart-beating and living donors; evolution within the last 10 years in UZ Leuven and Collaborative Donor Hospitals.

Over the past 10 years, the University Hospitals Leuven and their group of Collaborative Donor Hospitals (approximately 20) have tried to maximize their contribution to the national and Eurotransplant donor pool. In this time period, 1042 potential donors and 703 effective donors were coordinated and their organs allocated through Eurotransplant. This activity represented approximately 30% of the national donor pool and approximately 32% of the national organ pool. For Belgium, the non-heart-beating donor activity represented 11.38% of all donors in 2006. Since 1997, 167 potential live donors have been screened in our center. Of these, 48 transplants (28.74%) (39 kidneys--9 livers) have been performed. A boost of screened candidates was seen over the last 3 years, with a 500% increase of records being evaluated. Although the Belgian live donation activity remains one of the lowest in the world, there has been a clear increase over the last 3 years with about 10% of all kidney transplant activity originating now from live donors.