Robert M. Merion

Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: The concept of a donor risk index

Transplant physicians and candidates have become increasingly aware that donor characteristics significantly impact liver transplantation outcomes. Although the qualitative effect of individual donor variables are understood, the quantitative risk associated with combinations of characteristics are unclear. Using national data from 1998 to 2002, we developed a quantitative donor risk index. Cox regression models identified seven donor characteristics that independently predicted significantly increased risk of graft failure. Donor age over 40 years (and particularly over 60 years), donation after cardiac death (DCD), and split/partial grafts were strongly associated with graft failure, while African‐American race, less height, cerebrovascular accident and ‘other’ causes of brain death were more modestly but still significantly associated with graft failure. Grafts with an increased donor risk index have been preferentially transplanted into older candidates (>50 years of age) with moderate disease severity (nonstatus 1 with lower model for end‐stage liver disease (MELD) scores) and without hepatitis C. Quantitative assessment of the risk of donor liver graft failure using a donor risk index is useful to inform the process of organ acceptance.

The Survival Benefit of Liver Transplantation

Demand for liver transplantation continues to exceed donor organ supply. Comparing recipient survival to that of comparable candidates without a transplant can improve understanding of transplant survival benefit. Waiting list and post‐transplant mortality was studied among a cohort of 12 996 adult patients placed on the waiting list between 2001 and 2003. Time‐dependent Cox regression models were fitted to determine relative mortality rates for candidates and recipients. Overall, deceased donor transplant recipients had a 79% lower mortality risk than candidates (HR = 0.21; p < 0.001). At Model for End‐stage Liver Disease (MELD) 18–20, mortality risk was 38% lower (p < 0.01) among recipients compared to candidates. Survival benefit increased with increasing MELD score; at the maximum score of 40, recipient mortality risk was 96% lower than that for candidates (p < 0.001). In contrast, at lower MELD scores, recipient mortality risk during the first post‐transplant year was much higher than for candidates (HR = 3.64 at MELD 6–11, HR = 2.35 at MELD 12–14; both p < 0.001). Liver transplant survival benefit at 1 year is concentrated among patients at higher risk of pre‐transplant death. Futile transplants among severely ill patients are not identified under current practice. With 1 year post‐transplant follow‐up, patients at lower risk of pre‐transplant death do not have a demonstrable survival benefit from liver transplant.

Report of a National Conference on Donation after cardiac death.

A national conference on organ donation after cardiac death (DCD) was convened to expand the practice of DCD in the continuum of quality end‐of‐life care.

Expanded criteria donors for kidney transplantation.

TransLife-Florida Hospital Medical Center, Orlando, FL Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR)/ University Renal Research and Education Association (URREA), Ann Arbor, MI Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA SRTR/University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI *Corresponding author: Friedrich K. Port, fport@urrea.org

A comprehensive risk quantification score for deceased donor kidneys: the kidney donor risk index.

Background. We propose a continuous kidney donor risk index (KDRI) for deceased donor kidneys, combining donor and transplant variables to quantify graft failure risk. Methods. By using national data from 1995 to 2005, we analyzed 69,440 first-time, kidney-only, deceased donor adult transplants. Cox regression was used to model the risk of death or graft loss, based on donor and transplant factors, adjusting for recipient factors. The proposed KDRI includes 14 donor and transplant factors, each found to be independently associated with graft failure or death: donor age, race, history of hypertension, history of diabetes, serum creatinine, cerebrovascular cause of death, height, weight, donation after cardiac death, hepatitis C virus status, human leukocyte antigen-B and DR mismatch, cold ischemia time, and double or en bloc transplant. The KDRI reflects the rate of graft failure relative to that of a healthy 40-year-old donor. Results. Transplants of kidneys in the highest KDRI quintile (>1.45) had an adjusted 5-year graft survival of 63%, compared with 82% and 79% in the two lowest KDRI quintiles (<0.79 and 0.79–<0.96, respectively). There is a considerable overlap in the KDRI distribution by expanded and nonexpanded criteria donor classification. Conclusions. The graded impact of KDRI on graft outcome makes it a useful decision-making tool at the time of the deceased donor kidney offer.

Results of the first year of the new liver allocation plan

Liver allocation policy in the U.S. was recently changed to a continuous disease severity scale with minimal weight given to time waiting in an effort to better prioritize deceased donor liver transplant candidates. We compared rates of waiting list registrations, removals, transplants, and deaths during the year prior to implementation of the new liver allocation policy (2/27/01–2/26/02, Era 1) with the first years experience (2/27/02–2/26/03, Era 2) under this new policy. Rates were adjusted for 1,000 patient years on the waiting list and compared using z‐tests. A 1‐sided test was used to compare death rates; 2‐sided tests were used to compare transplant rates. Overall and subgroup analyses were performed for demographic, geographic, and medical strata. In Era 2, we observed a 12% reduction in new liver transplant waiting list registrations, with the largest reductions seen in new registrants with low MELD/PELD scores. In Era 2, there was a 3.5% reduction in waiting list death rate (P = .076) and a 10.2% increase in cadaveric transplants (P < .001). The reduction in waiting list mortality and increase in transplantation rates were evenly distributed across all demographic and medical strata, with some variation across geographic variables. Early patient and graft survival after deceased donor liver transplantation remains unchanged. In conclusion, by eliminating the categorical waiting list prioritization system that emphasized time waiting, the new system has been associated with reduced registrations and improved transplantation rates without increased mortality rates for individual groups of waiting candidates or changes in early transplant survival rates. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:7–15.)

First-pass metabolism of cyclosporin by the gut.

Cyclosporin is thought to be exclusively metabolised in the liver. We instilled cyclosporin into the small bowel of 2 patients during the anhepatic phase of liver transplantation; cyclosporin metabolites were readily detected in portal venous blood. Our findings indicate that the small intestine is a major site of cyclosporin breakdown: such intestinal metabolism might help to explain the poor oral bioavailability and drug interactions of cyclosporin.

Randomized controlled trial of hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open surgical, live donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy for renal transplantation is being performed in increasing numbers with the goals of broadening organ supply while minimizing pain and duration of convalescence for donors. Relative advantages in terms of recovery provided by laparoscopy over standard open surgery have not been rigorously assessed. We hypothesized that laparoscopic as compared with open surgical live donor nephrectomy provides briefer, less intense, and more complete convalescence. METHODS Of 105 volunteer, adult, potential living-renal donors interested in the laparoscopic approach, 70 were randomly assigned to undergo either hand-assisted laparoscopic or open surgical live donor nephrectomy at a single referral center. Objective data and subjective recovery information obtained with telephone interviews and validated questionnaires administered 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 6-12 months postoperatively were compared between the 23 laparoscopic and 27 open surgical patients. RESULTS There was 47% less analgesic use (P=0.004), 35% shorter hospital stay (P=0.0001), 33% more rapid return to nonstrenuous activity (P=0.006), 23% sooner return to work (P=0.037), and 73% less pain 6 weeks postoperatively (P=0.004) in the laparoscopy group. Laparoscopic patients experienced complete recovery sooner (P=0.032) and had fewer long-term residual effects (P=0.0015). CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is associated with a briefer, less intense, and more complete convalescence compared with the open surgical approach.

OUTCOMES OF 385 ADULT-TO-ADULT LIVING DONOR LIVER TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS: A REPORT FROM THE A2ALL CONSORTIUM

Objective:The objective of this study was to characterize the patient population with respect to patient selection, assess surgical morbidity and graft failures, and analyze the contribution of perioperative clinical factors to recipient outcome in adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT). Summary Background Data:Previous reports have been center-specific or from large databases lacking detailed variables. The Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) represents the first detailed North American multicenter report of recipient risk and outcome aiming to characterize variables predictive of graft failure. Methods:Three hundred eighty-five ALDLT recipients transplanted at 9 centers were studied with analysis of over 35 donor, recipient, intraoperative, and postoperative variables. Cox regression models were used to examine the relationship of variables to the risk of graft failure. Results:Ninety-day and 1-year graft survival were 87% and 81%, respectively. Fifty-one (13.2%) grafts failed in the first 90 days. The most common causes of graft failure were vascular thrombosis, primary nonfunction, and sepsis. Biliary complications were common (30% early, 11% late). Older recipient age and length of cold ischemia were significant predictors of graft failure. Center experience greater than 20 ALDLT was associated with a significantly lower risk of graft failure. Recipient Model for End-stage Liver Disease score and graft size were not significant predictors. Conclusions:This multicenter A2ALL experience provides evidence that ALDLT is a viable option for liver replacement. Older recipient age and prolonged cold ischemia time increase the risk of graft failure. Outcomes improve with increasing center experience.

Renal transplantation in elderly patients older than 70 years of age: results from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.

Background. Elderly patients (ages 70 yr and older) are among the fastest-growing group starting renal-replacement therapy in the United States. The outcomes of elderly patients who receive a kidney transplant have not been well studied compared with those of their peers on the waiting list. Methods. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we analyzed data from 5667 elderly renal transplant candidates who initially were wait-listed from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2004. Of these candidates, 2078 received a deceased donor transplant, and 360 received a living donor transplant by 31 December 2005. Time-to-death was studied using Cox regression models with transplant as a time-dependent covariate. Mortality hazard ratios (RRs) of transplant versus waiting list were adjusted for recipient age, sex, race, ethnicity, blood type, panel reactive antibody, year of placement on the waiting list, dialysis modality, comorbidities, donation service area, and time from first dialysis to first placement on the waiting list. Results. Elderly transplant recipients had a 41% lower overall risk of death compared with wait-listed candidates (RR=0.59; P<0.0001). Recipients of nonstandard, that is, expanded criteria donor, kidneys also had a significantly lower mortality risk (RR=0.75; P<0.0001). Elderly patients with diabetes and those with hypertension as a cause of end-stage renal disease also experienced a large benefit. Conclusions. Transplantation offers a significant reduction in mortality compared with dialysis in the wait-listed elderly population with end-stage renal disease.