The effect of HLA class I (A and B) and class II (DR) compatibility on liver transplantation outcomes: an analysis of the OPTN database.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility and liver transplantation outcomes by analyzing the effect of HLA compatibility on 5-year graft survival. We analyzed first liver transplants between 1987 and 2002 in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database, where A, B, or DR loci data were available. Graft failure was defined as retransplantation or death from transplant-related cause. We evaluated associations between total and locus-specific match levels and 5-year graft survival. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazard models were used to evaluate statistical interactions and adjust for the effect of potential confounders. Among 29,675 first-time transplants, the overall degree of HLA match had no effect on 5-year graft survival, even after controlling for potential confounders. Univariate and multivariable analyses showed that the 0 HLA antigen mismatch cohort of patients had higher 5-year graft failure rates than the other 6 antigen mismatch groups. However, this occurred in a small group with a disproportionately large number of live donors and split-liver recipients. When these recipients were excluded from the analysis, the effect was no longer seen. Finally, multivariable, locus-specific analyses showed no association between 5-year graft survival and degree of match/mismatch and the A, B, or DR loci. In conclusion, this careful examination of the OPTN database, with respect to HLA match or mismatch and liver graft survival, reaffirms that HLA matching has no clinically significant impact on this outcome.     

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatitis C

Liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma related to chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are currently the most common indications for liver transplantation. The number of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) procedures has increased given the shortage of donor organs from deceased donors. However, recurrence of HCV infection is universal and affects graft survival. This mini-review compared the outcomes for HCV-positive recipients after LDLT with those after deceased donor liver transplantation.     

Adult living donor liver transplantation: living donation of the right liver lobe

Background Adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become a routine treatment option for patients waiting for liver transplantation. In European and North American countries, LDLT for adult recipients is mainly performed with right lobe grafts. Indications, when compared to deceased donor liver transplantation, are controversial. Materials and methods In our institution, patients suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis, non-resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma, viral hepatitis associated cirrhosis, as well as cholestatic liver and biliary disease are considered good candidates for LDLT. Results In this overview, donor evaluation, graft selection, and the donor operation with special regard to operative techniques and strategies are discussed. For visualization, a 5-min video sequence of the standard donor operation as performed in our institution is attached. Conclusion Given the ongoing shortage of donor organs, adult LDLT has become a routine treatment option for patients waiting for liver transplantation. The associated inevitable risk for the healthy donor, however, remains ethically controversial. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Graft and patient survival after adult live donor liver transplantation compared to a matched cohort who received a deceased donor transplantation.

Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become increasingly common in the United States and around the world. In this study, we compared the outcome of 764 patients who received LDLT in the United States and compared the results with a matched population that received deceased donor transplantation (DDLT) using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. For each LDLT recipient (n = 764), two DDLT recipients (n = 1,470), matched for age, gender, race, diagnosis, and year of transplantation, were selected from the UNOS data after excluding multiple organ transplantation or retransplantation, children, and those with incomplete data. Despite our matching, recipients of LDLT had more stable liver disease, as shown by fewer patients with UNOS status 1 or 2A, in an intensive care unit, or on life support. Creatinine and cold ischemia time were also lower in the LDLT group. Primary graft nonfunction, hyperacute rejection rates, and patient survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis were similar in both groups (2-year survival was 79.0% in LDLT vs. 80.7% in case-controls; P = .5), but graft survival was significantly lower in LDLT (2-year graft survival was 64.4% vs. 73.3%; P < .001). Cox regression (after adjusting for confounding variables) analysis showed that LDLT recipients were 60% more likely to lose their graft compared to DDLT recipients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6; confidence interval 1.1-2.5). Among hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients, LDLT recipients showed lower graft survival when compared to those who received DDLT. In conclusion, short-term patient survival in LDLT is similar to that in the DDLT group, but graft survival is significantly lower in LDLT recipients. LDLT is a reasonable option for patients who are unlikely to receive DDLT in a timely fashion.     

Right-liver living donor transplantation for decompensated end-stage liver disease

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with decompensated end-stage liver disease (DELD) is controversial. Nevertheless, these patients are most in need of a timely liver transplant. We present the results of 7 patients who underwent transplantation with this procedure and discuss the rationale for its possible broader application. Seven of 51 patients who underwent right LDLT (segments 5 to 8) between August 1998 and April 2001 had DELD, defined as Child-Pugh-Turcotte score greater than 13 or Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score greater than 30. All patients also were listed for cadaveric liver transplantation. Mean age of the 7 transplant recipients was 54 years (range, 44 to 63 years). Three patients had ethyltoxic cirrhosis; 2 patients, hepatitis C; 1 patient, hepatitis B; and 1 patient, autoimmune hepatitis cirrhosis. The average intensive care unit stay was 23 days (range, 3 to 88 days), and average hospital stay was 77 days (range, 27 to 132 days). Three patients are alive 31, 21, and 17 months after LDLT. At a mean follow-up of 15.1 ± 10 months, patient and graft survival rates are 43%. Four transplant recipients died day 30, 60, 117, and 180 after transplantation. Three of the seven donors (43%) experienced a complication. At present, all donors are well and have returned to their normal activities. No donors had regrets about the procedure, and all donors stated that they would donate again if presented with the same decision. In conclusion, with the lack of other therapeutic options, LDLT represents a timely and effective alternative to cadaveric liver transplantation. Better outcome is foreseeable with a decrease in posttransplantation complications and more experience in predicting survival of these critical patients. (Liver Transpl 2002;8:340-346.)     

Risk factors for acute rejection in living donor liver transplantation

The influence of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility and lymphocytotoxic crossmatch on acute rejection in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has not been well examined. We analyzed 100 consecutive adult LDLT cases. The patient and graft survival rates and post-operative complications were assessed. The relation between the incidence of acute rejection and some clinical factors including HLA and lymphocytotoxic matching was also examined. Patients with HLA DR zero mismatching (p = 0.02) or negative T-lymphocytotoxic crossmatch (p = 0.04) had a significantly lower chance of rejection within 6 wk after LDLT. However the results had no influence on the patient survival. Our results demonstrate that in LDLT, a graft from an HLA-DR zero mismatching or negative T-lymphocytotoxic crossmatch might be advantageous because of the decreased probability of early acute rejection.     

Live donor liver transplantation in adults

Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was initiated in 1988 for children recipients. Its application to adult recipients was limited by graft size until the first right liver LDLT was performed in Hong Kong in 1996. Since then, right liver graft has become the major graft type. Despite rapid adoption of LDLT by many centers, many controversies on donor selection, indications, techniques, and ethics exist. With the recent known 11 donor deaths around the world, transplant surgeons are even more cautious than the past in the evaluation and selection of donors. The need for routine liver biopsy in donor evaluation is arguable but more and more centers opt for a policy of liberal liver biopsy. Donation of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) in the right liver graft was considered unsafe but now data indicate that the outcome of donors with or without MHV donation is about equal. Right liver LDLT has been shown to improve the overall survival rate of patients with chronic liver disease, acute or acute-on-chronic liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma waiting for liver transplantation. The outcome of LDLT is equivalent to deceased donor liver transplantation despite a smaller graft size and higher technical complexity.     

Clinical outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive patients

BACKGROUND: Whether hepatitis C virus recurrence occurs earlier and with greater severity for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) than for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) has recently become a subject of debate. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes for a cohort of 91 HCV-positive patients who underwent LDLT at Kyoto University with a median follow-up period of 25 months. RESULTS: Overall 5-year patient survival for HCV patients was similar to that for non-HCV patients (n=209) who underwent right-lobe LDLT at our institute (69% vs. 71%). Survival rate of patients without HCC (n=34) tended to be better than that of patients with HCC (n=57) (82% vs. 60%, P=0.069). According to annual liver biopsy, rate of fibrosis progression to stage 2 or more (representing significant fibrosis) was 39% at 2 years after LDLT. Univariate analysis showed that female recipient and male donor represented significant risk factors for significant fibrosis. Progression to severe recurrence (defined as the presence of liver cirrhosis (F4) in a liver biopsy and/or the development of clinical decompensation) was observed in five patients. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative patient survival was similar for HCV-positive and -negative recipients in our adult LDLT series. Rates of progression to severe disease due to HCV recurrence seemed comparable between our LDLT recipients and DDLT recipients described in the literature. Although longer-term follow-up is required, our results suggest that LDLT can produce acceptable outcomes also for patients suffering from HCV-related cirrhosis.     

Preoperative imaging evaluation of potential living liver donors: reasons for exclusion from donation in adult living donor liver transplantation

Accurate pretransplant evaluation of a potential donor in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is essential in preventing postoperative liver failure and optimizing safety. The aim of this study was to investigate the reasons for exclusion from donation of potential donors in adult LDLT. From September 2003 to June 2006, 266 potential donors were evaluated for 215 recipients: 220 potential donors for 176 adult recipients; 46 for 39 pediatric recipients. Imaging modalities including Doppler ultrasound, computerized tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance (MR) angiography provided vascular evaluation and MR cholangiopancreatography to evaluate biliary anatomy. Calculation of liver volume and assessment of steatosis were performed by enhanced and nonenhanced CT, respectively. In the adult group, only 83 (37.7%) potential donors were considered suitable for LDLT. Of the 137 unsuitable potential donors, 36 (26.2%) candidates were canceled because of recipient issues that included death of 15 recipients (10.9%), main portal vein thrombosis (8%), recipient condition beyond surgery (5%), and no indication for liver transplantation due to disease improvement (2%). The remaining 101 (73.8%) candidates who were excluded included steatosis (27.7%), an inadequate remnant volume (57.4%), small-for-size graft (8.9%), HLA-homozygous donor leading to one-way donor-recipient HLA match (3%), psychosocial problems (4%), as well as variations of hepatic artery (4%), portal vein (1%), and biliary system anatomy (5%). Anatomic considerations were not the main reason for exclusion of potential donors. An inadequate remnant liver volume (<30%) is the crucial point for the adult LDLT decision.     

Human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 infection worsens prognosis of hepatitis C virus-related living donor liver transplantation

Severe and life-threatening donor-transmitted human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infections after solid organ transplantation have been reported. However, in HTLV-1-infected recipients, graft and patient survival were not fully evaluated. A total of 140 patients underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Of these, 47 of 126 adult recipients showed indications of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease. The HTLV-1 prevalence rate was 10 of 140 recipients (7.14%) and three of 140 donors (0.02%). In HCV-related LDLT, graft and patient survival was worsened by HTLV-1 infection in recipients (seven cases). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates in the HCV/HTLV-1-co-infected group were 67%, 32%, and 15%, respectively, and the corresponding rates in the HCV-mono-infected group were 80%, 67%, and 67%, respectively. Only the 5-year survival rates were statistically significant (P=0.04, log-rank method). HTLV-1 infection in recipients is also an important factor in predicting survival in HTLV-1 endemic areas.     

Effect of nonviral factors on hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE: Hepatitis C (HCV) is now the most common indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). While graft reinfection remains universal, progression to graft cirrhosis is highly variable. This study examined donor, recipient, and operative variables to identify factors that affect recurrence of HCV post-OLT to facilitate graft-recipient matching. METHODS: Retrospective review of 307 patients who underwent OLT for HCV over a 10-year period at our center. Recurrence of HCV was identified by the presence of biochemical graft dysfunction and concurrent liver biopsy showing diagnostic pathologic features. Time to recurrence was the endpoint for statistical analysis. Five donor, 6 recipient, and 2 operative variables that may affect recurrence were analyzed by univariate comparison and Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Recurrence-free survival in the 307 study patients was 69% and 34% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Four predictive variables related to either donor or recipient characteristics were identified. Advanced donor age, prolonged donor hospitalization, increasing recipient age, and elevated recipient MELD scores were found to increase the relative risk of HCV recurrence. Examination of HLA disparity between donors and recipients demonstrated no correlation between class I or class II mismatches and recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified donor and recipient characteristics that significantly predict hepatitis C recurrence following liver transplantation. These factors are identifiable before transplant and, if considered when matching donors to HCV recipients, may decrease the incidence of HCV recurrence after OLT. A change in the current national liver allocation system would be needed to realize the full value of this benefit.     

Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score does not predict patient or graft survival in living donor liver transplant recipients

Although living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a successful procedure for most recipients, outcomes in patients who undergo transplantation as United Network for Organ Sharing status 2A are marginal. There are no published data on living donor liver transplant recipient outcomes relative to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. Such information could be useful in living donor liver transplant recipient selection. We retrospectively analyzed all non-fulminant hepatic failure, right hepatic lobe, adult-to-adult living donor liver transplant recipients at our center between August 1997 and March 2002. We calculated MELD scores at the time of LDLT and correlated scores with 1-year patient and graft survival and hospital days during the 90-day post-LDLT period. There were 62 recipients with greater than 6 months of follow-up: 38 men, 24 women; mean age, 47.9 years; 42 white, 1 black, 17 Hispanic, and 2 Asian patients. Twenty-nine patients had hepatitis C virus infection; 4 patients, hepatitis C virus infection and alcoholic liver disease; 4 patients, alcoholic liver disease; 4 patients, cryptogenic cirrhosis; 13 patients, primary sclerosing cholangitis; 5 patients, autoimmune hepatitis; and 3 patients, primary biliary cirrhosis. Mean and median MELD scores were 15.2 and 13, respectively (range, 6 to 40). One-year patient and graft survival were 59 of 62 patients (95%) and 52 of 62 patients (84%), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between median MELD scores of dead versus living patients (15 v 13; P = .15) or patients who underwent retransplantation versus those who did not (16.5 v 13; P = .30). Mean and median hospital days in the 90-day post-LDLT period were 23.7 and 16.0 days, respectively. Living donor liver transplant recipients with a MELD score of 18 or greater had significantly more hospital days compared with recipients with a MELD score less than 18 (35.2 v 19.8 days; P = .01). In conclusion, MELD scores did not predict post-LDLT patient or graft survival at 1 year. However, higher MELD scores (≥18) were associated with more hospital days during the 3-month post-LDLT period. (Liver Transpl 2003;9:737-740.)     

Outcomes in hepatitis C virus-infected recipients of living donor vs. deceased donor liver transplantation.

In this retrospective study of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected transplant recipients in the 9-center Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study, graft and patient survival and the development of advanced fibrosis were compared among 181 living donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients and 94 deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) recipients. Overall 3-year graft and patient survival were 68% and 74% in LDLT, and 80% and 82% in DDLT, respectively. Graft survival, but not patient survival, was significantly lower for LDLT compared to DDLT (P = 0.04 and P = 0.20, respectively). Further analyses demonstrated lower graft and patient survival among the first 20 LDLT cases at each center (LDLT 20; P = 0.002 and P = 0.002, respectively) and DDLT recipients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.008, respectively). Graft and patient survival in LDLT >20 and DDLT were not significantly different (P = 0.66 and P = 0.74, respectively). Overall, 3-year graft survival for DDLT, LDLT >20, and LDLT 20 were not significantly different. Important predictors of graft loss in HCV-infected patients were limited LDLT experience, pretransplant HCC, and higher MELD at transplantation.     

Live donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure

BACKGROUND: Acute liver failure (ALF) carries a high mortality unless urgent orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is performed on time. Live donors are utilized to treat this irreversible condition first in pediatric cases and then in adults. Herein, we aimed to report our experience with live donors for ALF in a country of a deceased donor organ donation rate is only 1.5 per million people. METHODS: Among the 245 live donor liver transplantations (LDLT) performed from June 1999 to December 2005, 14 of them (6%) were performed for ALF in 8 pediatric and 6 adult cases. Right lobes were harvested for the adult cases whereas left lateral segments were harvested for pediatric cases, except one child transplanted with a right lobe graft. The etiology of the disease was; acute hepatitis B in four cases, hepatitis A in three cases, Wilson disease two cases, autoimmune hepatitis in two cases, and was unknown in three cases. RESULTS: Three-year graft and patient survival is 79% for these series. Five of the six adult patients and six of the eight pediatric cases survived after transplantation. There was not any donor mortality or major morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: LDLT offers a safe and effective modality of treatment for ALF for both pediatric and adult patients to overcome the problem of organ shortage especially in countries where the chance of receiving an organ from a deceased donor is low.     

Impact of human leukocyte antigen matching in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibilities are beneficial in the setting of kidney transplantation but have demonstrated inconclusive results after liver transplantation. On the basis of recent controversial reports, the authors analyzed the impact of HLA matching in their patients after liver transplantation under modern immunosuppressive drug regimens and new HLA typing techniques with respect to outcome and adverse immunologic events. METHODS: Data from 924 transplants with complete donor-recipient HLA typing were retrospectively analyzed. Immunosuppression was commenced as either cyclosporine A- or tacrolimus-based therapy in different protocols. The follow-up period ranged from 1 to 144.8 months (median, 66 months). RESULTS: The actuarial graft survival was 88% after 1 year and 78.7% after 5 years and was similar in tacrolimus- and cyclosporine A-treated patients. However, cyclosporine A-treated patients underwent significantly more rejection episodes. The number of HLA compatibilities had no influence on graft survival, whereas the number of acute rejections was significantly less in transplants with more HLA compatibilities (P<0.05). Graft survival tended to be improved in patients with chronic hepatitis B and more HLA compatibilities (P=0.05). In contrast, graft survival in transplants for primary sclerosing cholangitis was significantly impaired in the presence of one or two HLA-DR compatibilities (P<0.05). In addition, in autoimmune hepatitis, survival tended to be lower in the presence of more HLA compatibilities (P=0.1). Overall graft survival or frequency of adverse immunologic events was not influenced by any specific donor-recipient HLA allele. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated fewer acute rejections in transplants with more HLA compatibilities. However, in liver transplantation, a more specific investigation of HLA typing may be necessary, because in some indications HLA antigens play a role in the nature of the disease. Therefore, recurrence of autoimmune disease may be more severe in patients sharing HLA antigens.     

Relevance of HLA compatibility in living donor liver transplantation: the double‐edged sword associated with the patient outcome

HLA compatibility in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) seems relevant to the acceptability of graft livers because LDLT recipients often share most or some part of HLAs with the respective donors. This study retrospectively investigated whether HLA compatibility affected the outcome of LDLT. Three hundred ninety LDLTs were performed in this hospital, and 346 pairs of HLAs (HLA‐A, B, DR) were retrieved from the medical record between October 1996 and March 2011. The dates of the deaths were censored when a recipient apparently died of or was retransplanted by other causes than graft failure because of host‐versus‐graft (HVG) response to purely analyze the outcomes of LDLT in view of HVG response. The relationship between HLA compatibility and graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD) was also analyzed. No recipients with recipient‐against‐donor HLA mismatch (R→D MM) 0 experienced graft failure by HVG response. On the other hand, three of five recipients with “R→D MM 0” together with “donor‐against‐recipient MM 3” died of fatal GVHD. HLA compatibility in LDLT not only affected the long‐term acceptance of graft livers but also the risk of fatal GVHD.     

Long-term incidence, risk factors, and management of biliary complications after adult living donor liver transplantation.

A considerable proportion of adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) recipients experience biliary complication (BC), but there are few reports regarding BC based on long-term studies of a large LDLT population. The present study examined BC incidence, risk factors and management using single-center data from 259 adult patients (225 right liver and 34 left liver grafts) between 2000 and 2002. The mean follow-up period was 46 +/- 14 months. Biliary reconstruction included single duct-to-duct anastomosis (DD, n = 141), double DD (n = 19), single hepaticojejunostomy (HJ, n = 67), double HJ (n = 28), and combined DD and HJ (n = 4). There were 12 episodes of anastomotic bile leak and 42 episodes of anastomotic stenosis in 50 recipients. Most leaks occurred within the first month, whereas stenosis occurred over 3 yr. Most stenoses were successfully treated using radiological intervention. Cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-yr BC rates were 12.9%, 18.2%, and 20.2%, respectively. BC occurred much more frequently in right liver grafts compared to left liver grafts (P = 0.024). Stenosis-free survival curves for right liver graft recipients were similar for all reconstruction groups. When right liver graft recipients with single biliary reconstructions were grouped according to graft duct size and type of biliary reconstruction, DD involving a small-sized duct (less than 4 mm in diameter) was found to be a BC risk factor (P = 0.015), whereas HJ involving such duct sizes was not found to be associated with a higher risk (P = 0.471). In conclusion, close surveillance for BC appears necessary for at least the first 3 yr after LDLT. We found that most BC could be successfully controlled using radiological intervention. In terms of anastomotic stenosis risk, HJ appears a better choice than DD for right liver grafts involving ducts less than 4 mm in diameter.     

Living donor liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was originally indicated only for elective cases of pediatric patients with end-stage liver disease. In Japan, however, where liver transplantation from brain-dead donor is performed very rarely, this indication has been expanded to emergency cases such as fulminant hepatic failure (FHF). METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with FHF were treated between May 1992 and April 1999. Causes of acute liver failure were non-A, non-B hepatitis in 27 patients, hepatitis B virus in seven, and hepatitis A virus, Epstein-Barr virus, herpes simplex virus, and chrome poisoning in one each. RESULTS: Four patients did not undergo LDLT because of severe brain damage or combined multiple organ failure. The remaining 34 patients underwent a total of 36 LDLTs, including two retransplantations; 16 children received transplants of 17 lateral segments, three children and eight adults transplants of 11 left lobes, and seven adults transplants of eight right lobes. A total of 15 recipients died, four of primary graft dysfunction, three of refractory acute rejection, two of pneumonia, and one each of ductopenic rejection, sepsis, aplastic anemis, recurrence of Epstein-Barr virus hepatitis, multiple organ failure by chrome poisoning, and unknown hepatic failure. Primary graft dysfunction developed in adult recipients with small-for-size graft transplants, whereas refractory acute rejection and ductopenic rejection occurred in six grafts each of children with non-A, non-B FHF. CONCLUSIONS: LDLT can be safely expanded to cases of FHF in adult patients. Primary graft dysfunction in adult recipients with small-for-size left lobe grafts can be overcome by using right lobes. However, refractory acute rejection and ductopenic rejection in children remain a major problem.     

Utilization of extended donor criteria liver allografts maximizes donor use and patient access to liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of systematic utilization of extended donor criteria liver allografts (EDC), including living donor allografts (LDLT), on patient access to liver transplantation (LTX). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Utilization of liver allografts that do not meet traditional donor criteria (EDC) offer immediate expansion of the donor pool. EDC are typically allocated by transplant center rather than regional wait-list priority (RA). This single-institution series compares outcomes of EDC and RA allocation to determine the impact of EDC utilization on donor use and patient access to LTX. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of 99 EDC recipients (49 deceased donor, 50 LDLT) and 116 RA recipients from April 2001 through April 2004. Deceased-donor EDC included: age >65 years, donation after cardiac death, positive viral serology (hepatitis C, hepatitis B core antibody, human T-cell lymphotrophic), split-liver, hypernatremia, prior carcinoma, steatosis, and behavioral high-risk donors. Outcome variables included patient and graft survival, hospitalization, initial graft function, and complication categorized as: biliary, vascular, wound, and other. RESULTS: EDC recipients were more frequently diagnosed with hepatitis C virus or hepatocellular carcinoma and had a lower model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score at LTX (P < 0.01). Wait-time, technical complications, and hospitalization were comparable. Log-rank analysis of Kaplan-Meier survival estimates demonstrated no difference in patient or graft survival; however, deaths among deceased-donor EDC recipients were frequently the result of patient comorbidities, whereas LDLT and RA deaths resulted from graft failure (P < 0.01). EDC increased patient access to LTX by 77% and reduced pre-LTX mortality by over 50% compared with regional data (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Systematic EDC utilization maximizes donor use, increases access to LTX, and significantly reduces wait-list mortality by providing satisfactory outcomes to select recipients.     

Outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus‐positive recipients in Japan: results of a nationwide survey

A nationwide survey of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐positive recipients was performed in Japan. A total of 514 recipients are reported and included in the study. The cumulative patient survival rate at 5 and 10 years was 72% and 63%, respectively. Of the 514 recipients, 142 patients (28%) died until the end of the observation, among which the leading cause was recurrent hepatitis C (42 cases). According to Cox regression multivariate analysis, donor age (>40), non‐right liver graft, acute rejection episode, and absence of a sustained virologic response were independent prognostic factors. Of the 514 recipients, 361 underwent antiviral treatment mainly with pegylated‐interferon and ribavirin (preemptive treatment in 150 patients and treatment for confirmed recurrent hepatitis in 211). The dose reduction rate and discontinuation rate were 40% and 42%, respectively, with a sustained virologic response rate of 43%. In conclusion, patient survival of HCV‐positive recipients after LDLT was good, with a 10‐year survival of 63%. Right liver graft might be preferable for HCV‐positive recipients in an LDLT setting.