Liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) occurs in the context of advanced liver disease and is associated with hepatic and extrahepatic organ failure, eventually leading to a major risk of short-term mortality. To date, there are very few effective therapeutic options for ACLF. In many cases, liver transplantation is the only life-saving treatment that has acceptable outcomes in carefully selected recipients. This Review addresses key aspects of the use of liver transplantation for patients with ACLF, providing an in-depth discussion of existing evidence regarding candidate selection, the optimal window for transplantation, potential prioritisation of liver grafts for this indication, and the global management of ACLF to bridge patients to liver transplantation.

The First Successful Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure Caused by Severe Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Case Report.

Liver transplantation (LT) is the only life-saving option when acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) does not improve with conservative therapy. Acute pancreatitis (AP) can cause chronic liver disease progression to ACLF. However, deceased donor LT for patients with AP has had mixed results, and no consensus has been established regarding the indication for LT. We report the first successful living donor LT (LDLT) for ACLF caused by severe AP. The 38-year-old patient with alcoholic liver disease was transferred to our institute with worsening refractory ascites. During the pretransplant workup, she developed severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis, resulting in grade 3 ACLF. The patient's clinical course was further complicated by high levels of donor-specific antibodies and immune thrombocytopenia. The AP gradually improved after intensive care combined with artificial liver support. The patient successfully underwent urgent LDLT with upfront splenectomy and desensitization therapy, including plasm exchange, high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin, and anti-thymocyte globulin. No infection or recurrence of AP was observed postoperatively. We conclude that LDLT is a feasible option for ACLF patients caused by severe AP if a deceased donor is not readily available.

[Transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure]. / Transplantation beim akut-auf-chronischen Leberversagen.

A review and discussion of the current literature on liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) was performed. The ACLF represents an acute deterioration of liver function with pre-existing liver disease and is associated with increasing multiorgan failure, depending on the stage. The 28-day mortality ranges to well over 70% in stage 3 and requires rapid intensive medical treatment involving an interdisciplinary team experienced in transplantation medicine. Under optimized conditions, liver transplantation provides long-term survival rates comparable to other indications. Achieving this requires a differentiated donor selection, choosing the appropriate time for transplantation in the context of a dynamic disease course and the use of appropriate surgical techniques.

Application of extended criteria donor grafts in liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the usage of extended criteria donor (ECD) grafts in liver transplantation (LT) for acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) patients. AIM: To summarize the experience of using ECD livers in ACLF-LT. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, enrolling patients who underwent LT at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University from January 2015 to November 2021. The patients were divided into ECD and non-ECD groups for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 145 recipients were enrolled in this study, of which ECD and non-ECD recipients accounted for 53.8% and 46.2%, respectively. Donation after cardiac death (DCD) recipients accounted for the minority compared with donation after brain death (DBD) recipients (16.6% vs 83.4%). Neither overall survival nor graft survival significantly differed between ECD and non-ECD and DCD and DBD recipients. ECD grafts were associated with a significantly higher incidence of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) than non-ECD grafts (67.9% vs 41.8%, P = 0.002). Postoperative outcomes between DCD and DBD recipients were comparable (P > 0.05). ECD graft (P = 0.009), anhepatic phase (P = 0.034) and recipient gamma glutamyltransferase (P = 0.016) were independent risk factors for EAD. Recipient preoperative number of extrahepatic organ failures > 2 (P = 0.015) and intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.000) were independent predictors of poor post-LT survival. CONCLUSION: Although related to a higher risk of EAD, ECD grafts can be safely used in ACLF-LT. The main factors affecting post-LT survival in ACLF patients are their own severe preoperative disease and intraoperative blood loss.

PROGNOSTIC FACTORS OF LIVER TRANSPLANTATION FOR ACUTE-ON-CHRONIC LIVER FAILURE.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) is the only treatment that can provide long-term survival for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Although several studies identify prognostic factors for patients in ACLF who do not undergo LT, there is scarce literature about prognostic factors after LT in this population. AIM: Evaluate outcomes of ACLF patients undergoing LT, studying prognostic factors related to 1-year and 90 days post-LT. METHODS: Patients with ACLF undergoing LT between January 2005 and April 2021 were included. Variables such as chronic liver failure consortium (CLIF-C) ACLF values and ACLF grades were compared with the outcomes. RESULTS: The ACLF survival of patients (n=25) post-LT at 90 days, 1, 3, 5 and 7 years, was 80, 76, 59.5, 54.1 and 54.1% versus 86.3, 79.4, 72.6, 66.5 and 61.2% for patients undergoing LT for other indications (n=344), (p=0.525). There was no statistical difference for mortality at 01 year and 90 days among patients with the three ACLF grades (ACLF-1 vs. ACLF-2 vs. ACLF-3) undergoing LT, as well as when compared to non-ACLF patients. CLIF-C ACLF score was not related to death outcomes. None of the other studied variables proved to be independent predictors of mortality at 90 days, 1 year, or overall. CONCLUSIONS: LT conferred long-term survival to most transplant patients. None of the studied variables proved to be a prognostic factor associated with post-LT survival outcomes for patients with ACLF. Additional studies are recommended to clarify the prognostic factors of post-LT survival in patients with ACLF.

Predicting post-liver transplant outcomes in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure using Expert-Augmented Machine Learning.

Liver transplantation (LT) is a treatment for acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), but high post-LT mortality has been reported. Existing post-LT models in ACLF have been limited. We developed an Expert-Augmented Machine Learning (EAML) model to predict post-LT outcomes. We identified ACLF patients who underwent LT in the University of California Health Data Warehouse. We applied the RuleFit machine learning (ML) algorithm to extract rules from decision trees and create intermediate models. We asked human experts to rate the rules generated by RuleFit and incorporated these ratings to generate final EAML models. We identified 1384 ACLF patients. For death at 1 year, areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve were 0.707 (confidence interval [CI] 0.625-0.793) for EAML and 0.719 (CI 0.640-0.800) for RuleFit. For death at 90 days, areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve were 0.678 (CI 0.581-0.776) for EAML and 0.707 (CI 0.615-0.800) for RuleFit. In pairwise comparisons, both EAML and RuleFit models outperformed cross-sectional models. Significant discrepancies between experts and ML occurred in rankings of biomarkers used in clinical practice. EAML may serve as a method for ML-guided hypothesis generation in further ACLF research.

[Management of liver transplantation perioperative period in acute-on-chronic liver failure].

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a potentially reversible entity that occurs in patients with chronic liver disease accompanied with or without cirrhosis and is characterized by extrahepatic organ failure and high short-term mortality. Currently, the most effective treatment method for patients with ACLF is liver transplantation; therefore, admission timing and contraindications must be emphasized. The function of vital organs such as the heart, brain, lungs, and kidneys should be actively supported and protected during the liver transplantation perioperative period in patients with ACLF. Focusing on the anesthesia management level during anesthesia selection, intraoperative monitoring, three-stage management, prevention and treatment of post-perfusion syndrome, monitoring and management of coagulation function, volume monitoring and management, and body temperature monitoring management for liver transplantation should strengthen anesthesia management. Additionally, standard postoperative intensive care treatment should be recommended, and grafts and other vital organ functions should be monitored throughout the perioperative period to promote early postoperative recovery in patients with ACLF.

[Focusing on timing selection and whole-course management of liver transplantation treatment for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure].

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a clinical syndrome of acute decompensation accompanied by organ failure that occurs on the basis of chronic liver disease and has a high short-term mortality rate. Currently, there are still differences in relation to the definition of ACLF; thus, baseline characteristics and dynamic changes are important bases for clinical decision-making in patients with liver transplantation and others. The basic strategies for treating ACLF currently include internal medicine treatment, artificial liver support systems, and liver transplantation. Multidisciplinary active collaborative management throughout the whole course is of great significance for further improving the survival rate in patients with ACLF.

Dynamic evaluation based on acute-on-chronic liver failure predicts survival of patients after liver transplantation: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Dynamic evaluation of critically ill patients is the key to predicting their outcomes. Most scores based on the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) utilize point-in-time assessment. This study mainly aimed to investigate the impact of dynamic clinical course change on post-liver transplantation (LT) survival. METHODS: This study included 637 adults (overall cohort) with benign end-stage liver diseases. The authors compared the MELD scores and our ACLF-based dynamic evaluation scores. Patients enrolled or transplanted with ACLF-3 were defined as the ACLF-3 cohort ( n =158). The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. ΔMELD and ΔCLIF-OF (Chronic Liver Failure-Organ Failure) represented the respective dynamic changes in liver transplant function. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the curve. A Cox regression analysis identified independent risk factors for specific organ failure and 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Patients were grouped into three groups: the deterioration group (D), the stable group (S), and the improvement group (I). The deterioration group (ΔCLIF-OF ≥2) was more likely to receive national liver allocation ( P =0.012) but experienced longer cold ischemia time ( P =0.006) than other groups. The area under the curves for ΔCLIF-OF were 0.752 for the entire cohort and 0.767 for ACLF-3 cohorts, both superior to ΔMELD ( P <0.001 for both). Compared to the improvement group, the 1-year mortality hazard ratios (HR) of the deterioration group were 12.57 (6.72-23.48) for the overall cohort and 7.00 (3.73-13.09) for the ACLF-3 cohort. Extrahepatic organs subscore change (HR=1.783 (1.266-2.512) for neurologic; 1.653 (1.205-2.269) for circulation; 1.906 (1.324-2.743) for respiration; 1.473 (1.097-1.976) for renal) were key to transplantation outcomes in the ACLF-3 cohort. CLIF-OF at LT (HR=1.193), ΔCLIF-OF (HR=1.354), and cold ischemia time (HR=1.077) were independent risk factors of mortality for the overall cohort, while ΔCLIF-OF (HR=1.384) was the only independent risk factor for the ACLF-3 cohort. Non-ACLF-3 patients showed a higher survival rate than patients with ACLF-3 in all groups ( P =0.002 for I, P =0.005 for S, and P =0.001 for D). CONCLUSION: This was the first ACLF-based dynamic evaluation study. ΔCLIF-OF was a more powerful predictor of post-LT mortality than ΔMELD. Extrahepatic organ failures were core risk factors for ACLF-3 patients. CLIF-OF at LT, ΔCLIF-OF, and cold ischemia time were independent risk factors for post-LT mortality. Patients with a worse baseline condition and a deteriorating clinical course had the worst prognosis. Dynamic evaluation was important in risk stratification and recipient selection.

High Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index, Predicting Early Allograft Dysfunction, Indicates High 90-Day Mortality for Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure after Liver Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) and 90-day mortality after liver transplantation (LT) in acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). METHODS: Retrospective record analysis was done on 114 patients who had LT for ACLF. To identify the ideal SII, the receiver operating characteristic curve was used. The incidence of EAD and 90-day mortality following LT were calculated. The prognostic value of SII was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier technique and the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The cut-off for SII was 201.5 (AUC = 0.728, p < 0.001). EAD occurred in 40 (35.1%) patients of the high SII group and 5 (4.4%) patients of the normal SII group, p < 0.001. 18 (15.8%) deaths occurred in the high SII group and 2 (1.8%) deaths occurred in the normal SII group, p = 0.008. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that SII ≥201.5, MELD ≥27 were independent prognostic factors for 90-day mortality after LT. CONCLUSION: SII predicts the occurrence of EAD and is an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality after LT.

Effect of acute on chronic liver failure over post-transplant survival.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is associated with reduced short-term survival, and liver transplantation is frequently the only therapeutic option. Nonetheless, the post-transplantation prognosis seems to be worse in ACLF patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The databases of two university centers were retrospectively evaluated, and adult patients with cirrhosis who underwent transplantation between 2013 and 2020 were included. One-year survival of patients with ACLF was compared to that of patients without ACLF. Variables associated with mortality were identified. RESULTS: A total of 428 patients were evaluated, and 303 met the inclusion criteria; 57.1% were male, the mean age was 57.1 ± 10.2 years, 75 patients had ACLF, and 228 did not. The main etiologies of ACLF were NASH (36.6%), alcoholic liver disease (13.9%), primary biliary cholangitis (8.6%) and autoimmune hepatitis (7.9%). Mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, the use of vasopressors and the requirement of blood product transfusion during liver transplantation were significantly more frequent in ACLF patients. Among those recipients without and with ACLF, survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 91.2% vs. 74.7%, 89.1% vs. 72.6% and 88.3% vs. 72.6%, respectively (p=0.001). Among pre-transplantation variables, only the presence of ACLF was independently associated with survival (HR 3.2, 95% CI: 1.46-7.11). Post-transplantation variables independently associated with survival were renal replacement therapy (HR 2.8, 95% CI: 1.1-6.8) and fungal infections (HR 3.26, 95% CI: 1.07-9.9). CONCLUSIONS: ACLF is an independent predictor of one-year post-transplantation survival. Importantly, transplant recipients with ACLF require the use of more resources than patients without ACLF.

Liver Transplantation in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure.

In recent years there has been a significant increase in the incidence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). This syndrome is characterized by infections, organ failures, and high short-term mortality. Although progress in the management of these sick patients has been evident, liver transplantation (LT) remains the best treatment modality to date. Several studies have reported LT as a feasible option, despite organ failures. The outcomes following LT are inversely related to the grade of ACLF. This review discusses the current literature on the feasibility, futility, timing, and outcomes of LT in patients with ACLF.

Maximizing the Donor Potential for Patients with Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure Listed for Liver Transplant.

Owing to inherent limitations of static cold storage, marginal liver grafts from donors after circulatory death and extended criteria donors after brain death are prone to be discarded secondary to the increased risk of severe early allograft dysfunction and ischemic cholangiopathy. Marginal liver grafts resuscitated with hypothermic machine perfusion and normothermic machine perfusion demonstrate lower degree of ischemia-reperfusion injury and have decreased risk of severe early allograft dysfunction and ischemic cholangiopathy. Marginal grafts preserved by ex vivo machine perfusion technology can be used to rescue patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure who are underserved by the current deceased donor liver allocation system.

A new dyslipidemia-based scoring model to predict transplant-free survival in patients with hepatitis E-triggered acute-on-chronic liver failure.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Hepatitis E virus (HEV)-triggered acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has unacceptably high short-term mortality. However, it is unclear whether the existing predictive scoring models are applicable to evaluate the prognosis of HEV-triggered ACLF. METHODS: We screened datasets of patients with HEV-triggered ACLF from a regional tertiary hospital for infectious diseases in Shanghai, China, between January 2011 and January 2021. Clinical and laboratory parameters were recorded and compared to determine a variety of short-term mortality risk factors, which were used to develop and validate a new prognostic scoring model. RESULTS: Out of 4952 HEV-infected patients, 817 patients with underlying chronic liver disease were enrolled in this study. Among these, 371 patients with HEV-triggered ACLF were identified and allocated to the training set (n = 254) and test set (n = 117). The analysis revealed that hepatic encephalopathy (HE), ascites, triacylglycerol and apolipoprotein A (apoA) were associated with 90-day mortality (P < 0.05). Based on these significant indicators, we designed and calculated a new prognostic score = 0.632 × (ascites: no, 1 point; mild to moderate, 2 points; severe, 3 points) + 0.865 × (HE: no, 1 point; grade 1-2, 2 points; grade 3-4, 3 points) - 0.413 × triacylglycerol (mmol/L) - 2.171 × apoA (g/L). Compared to four well-known prognostic models (MELD score, CTP score, CLIF-C OFs and CLIF-C ACLFs), the new scoring model is more accurate, with the highest auROCs of 0.878 and 0.896, respectively, to predict 28- and 90-day transplantation-free survival from HEV-triggered ACLF. When our model was compared to COSSH ACLF IIs, there was no significant difference. The test data also demonstrated good concordance. CONCLUSIONS: This study is one of the first to address the correlation between hepatitis E and serum lipids and provides a new simple and efficient prognostic scoring model for HEV-triggered ACLF.

Liver Transplantation Within 7-Days of Listing Improves Survival in ACLF-3.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF-3) have a very high short-term mortality without liver transplantation (LT). Our objective was to determine whether early LT (ELT; ≤ 7 days from listing) had an impact on 1 year patient (PS) in patients with ACLF-3 compared to late LT (LLT; days 8-28 from listing). METHODS: All adults with ACLF-3 listed for LT with the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) between 2005 and 2021 were included. We excluded status one patients and those with liver cancer or listed for multi-organ or living donor transplants. ACLF patients were identified using the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure criteria. Patients were categorized as ACLF-3a and ACLF-3b. RESULTS: During the study period, 7607 patients were listed with ACLF-3 (3a-4520, 3b-3087); 3498 patients with ACLF-3 underwent ELT and 1308 had LLT. The overall 1 year PS after listing was 64.4% in ACLF-3a and 50% in ACLF-3b. In 4806 ACLF-3 patients who underwent LT, 1 year PS was 86.2%, but those who had ELT had higher survival (87.1 vs. 83.6%, P = 0.001) than the LLT group. These survival benefits were seen in both ACLF-3a and ACLF-3b. On multivariable analysis, age (HR 1.02, CI 1.01-1.03), diabetes (HR 1.40, CI 1.16-1.68), respiratory failure (HR 1.76, CI 1.50-2.08), donor risk index > 1.7 (HR 1.24, CI 1.06-1.45), and LLT (HR 1.20, CI 1.02-1.43) were independent predictors of higher 1 year mortality while higher albumin (HR 0.89, CI 0.80-0.98) was associated with reduced mortality. CONCLUSION: Early LT (≤ 7 days from listing) in ACLF-3 is associated with better 1 year survival compared to late LT (days 8-28 from listing).

SPP1 as a risk factor for patients with acute on chronic liver failure undergoing liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) is characterized by systemic inflammation and significant mortality, calling for accurate assessment due to the diverse prognosis of liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: 8 patients with ACLF and 4 normal controls (NC) underwent peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) transcriptomics, whereas 9 patients with ACLF and 3 NC had hepatic CD45+ T cells transcriptomics. Thecandidateindicatorfoundinthetranscriptomicswas confirmedbya retrospective cohort (n = 137) and one prospective cohort (n = 68). RESULTS: Transcriptomics revealed significant differentially expression genes (DEGs) and bioprocesses related to the PBMCs and hepatic CD45+ T cells. Secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1) was identified as a potential indicator for ACLF patients receiving LT, which was supported by evidence from the cross-sectional cohorts. As the condition of ACLF got worse, so did SPP1 levels, which were associated with liver failure and coagulation failure. SPP1 levels prior to LT were considerably greater in non-survivors of ACLF within 90 days than that in survivors. In the derivation cohort and validation cohort, ACLF patients with elevated SPP1 levels had significantly shorter cumulative survival durations than those with low SPP1 levels, P = 0.02 and P < 0.001, respectively. The SPP1-MELD and SPP1-chronic liver failure consortium (CLIF-C) ACLF scores had comparatively larger areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) than MELD (P = 0.0388) and CLIF-C ACLF (P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: The circulating SPP1 showed promise as a predictor for ACLF patients receiving LT, which demonstrated the need for tracking the clinical outcome of LT.

Should patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3 receive higher priority for liver transplantation?

In this debate, the authors consider whether patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3 (ACLF-3) should receive higher liver transplant priority, with reference to the following clinical case: a 62-year-old male with a history of decompensated alcohol-associated cirrhosis, with recurrent ascites and hepatic encephalopathy, and metabolic comorbidities (type 2 diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension and a BMI of 31 kg/m2). A few days following evaluation for liver transplantation (LT), the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit and placed on mechanical ventilation for neurological failure, FiO2 of 0.3 with a SpO2 of 98%, and started on norepinephrine at 0.62 µg/kg/min. He had been abstinent since the diagnosis of cirrhosis a year prior. Laboratory results at admission were: leukocyte count 12.1 G/L, international normalised ratio 2.1, creatinine 2.4 mg/dl, sodium 133 mmol/L, total bilirubin 7 mg/dl, lactate 5.5 mmol/L, with a MELD-Na score of 31 and a CLIF-C ACLF score of 67. On the 7th day after admission, the patient was placed on the LT waiting list. On the same day, he had massive variceal bleed with hypovolemic shock requiring terlipressin, transfusion of three red blood cell units, and endoscopic band ligation. On day 10, the patient was stabilised with a low dose of norepinephrine 0.03 µg/kg/min, with no new sepsis or bleeding. However, the patient was still intubated for grade 2 hepatic encephalopathy and on renal replacement therapy with a lactate level of 3.1 mmol/L. The patient is currently categorised as having ACLF-3, with five organ failures (liver, kidney, coagulation, circulation, and respiration). Based on the severity of his liver disease and multiorgan failure, the patient is at an exceedingly high risk of death without LT. Is it appropriate to perform LT in such a patient?