B Desschans

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.

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

Abstract 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 > 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).

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?

Abstract 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

Abstract 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 ~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 ~30% of the national donor pool. Over the last 10 years, more than 1100 kidneys, more than 500 livers, ~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.

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

Abstract Over the past 10 years, the University Hospitals Leuven and their group of Collaborative Donor Hospitals (~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 ~30% of the national donor pool and ~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.

A retrospective database analysis to evaluate the potential of EVLP to recruit declined lung donors

Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is currently used for both standard and extended‐criteria donor (ECD) lungs. To enlarge the donor pool, we might have to extend the threshold for ECD donation. The purpose of this study was to estimate how many additional ECD lungs could be recruited by EVLP. We reviewed all multi‐organ donors (MODs) from our collaborative donor hospitals (January 2010–June 2015). All unused lung donors were categorized using registered donor data and evaluated by two independent investigators to identify which lungs could be transplanted after EVLP. 584 MODs were registered at our transplant center. 268 (45.9%) were declined as lung donor at the moment of registration, and 316 (54.1%) were considered as a donor for lung transplantation. In the latter, lungs from 220 (37.7%) donors were transplanted and 96 donors (16.4%) were not. We identified 78 of 364 declined donors (21.4%) whose lungs could potentially become transplantable after EVLP. With this retrospective database analysis of unused lung donors, we identified a large potential for EVLP to further increase the donor pool in transplant centers where the majority of donor lungs are already extended.