Search

Data on adult liver transplants performed in the US in 2016 are no-table for (1) the largest total number of transplants performed (7841); (2) the shortest median waiting time in recent history (11.3 months); (3) continued reduction in waitlist registrations and transplants for hepatitis C-related indications; (4) increasing numbers of patients whose clinical profiles are consistent with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; and (5) equilibration of transplant rates in patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma. Despite the increase in the number of available organs, waitlist mortality remained an important concern. Graft survival rates continued to improve. In 2016, 723 new active candidates were added to the pediatric liver transplant waiting list, down from a peak of 826 in 2005. The number of prevalent candidates (on the list on December 31 of the given year) was stable, 408 active and 169 inactive. The number of pediatric living donor liver transplants decreased from a peak of 79 in 2015 to 62 in 2016, with most from donors closely related to the recipients. Graft survival continued to improve over the past decade among recipients of deceased donor and living donor livers.

During 2013, 10,479 adult candidates were added to the liver transplant waiting list, compared with 10,185 in 2012; 5921 liver transplants were performed, and 211 of the transplanted organs were from living donors. As of December 31, 2013, 15,027 candidates were registered on the waiting list, including 12,407 in active status. The most significant change in allocation policy affecting liver waitlist trends in 2013 was the Share 35 policy, whereby organs from an entire region are available to candidates with model for end-stage liver disease scores of 35 or higher. Median waiting time for such candidates decreased dramatically, from 14.0 months in 2012 to 1.4 months in 2013, but the effect on waitlist mortality is unknown. The number of new active pediatric candidates added to the liver transplant waiting list increased to 693 in 2013. Transplant rates were highest for candidates aged younger than 1 year (275.6 per 100 waitlist years) and lowest for candidates aged 11 to 17 years (97.0 per 100 waitlist years). Five-year graft survival was 71.7% for recipients aged younger than 1 year, 74.9% for ages 1 to 5 years, 78.9% ages 6 to 10 years, and 77.4% for ages 11 to 17 years.

Questions about appropriate allocation of simultaneous liver and kidney transplants (SLK) are being asked because kidney dysfunction in the context of liver failure enhances access to deceased donor organs. There is specific concern that some patients who undergo combined liver and kidney transplantation may have reversible renal failure. There is also concern that liver transplants are placed prematurely in those with end-stage renal disease. Thus to assure allocation of transplants only to those truly in need, the transplant community met in March 2006 to review post-MELD (model for end-stage liver disease) data on the impact of renal function on liver waitlist and transplant outcomes and the results of SLK.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major health care issue in liver and kidney transplantation. Besides negatively affecting both patient and graft survival, HCV is associated with a heightened risk for new onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). The mechanisms underlying the diabetogenicity of HCV are complex but are likely to involve insulin resistance caused by inhibitory actions of the virus on insulin regulatory pathways in the liver. The resultant glucose dysregulation is an important determinant of increased morbidity and mortality in liver and kidney recipients. This review highlights the concerns for outcomes in HCV-positive liver and kidney transplant patients with particular focus on the interrelationship between hepatitis C and diabetes. Data about the potential role of calcineurin inhibitors, corticosteroids and mycophenolate mofetil in HCV infection and HCV-associated NODM will also be discussed.

The variable impact of specific risk factors on survival outcomes based on pre-transplantation diagnosis was analyzed in adult liver transplant recipients reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: 778 with hepatitis B (HBV), 3463 with hepatitis C (HCV) and 7429 without viral hepatitis. Graft and patient survival for the HBV and no viral hepatitis groups did not differ significantly. The HCV group had significantly lower graft (p = 0.0019) and patient survival (p0.0001) than the no viral hepatitis group. Patient survival was significantly lower (p = 0.0011) for HCV compared to HBV patients; differences in graft survival approached significance (p = 0.0561). Donor age, which was not a risk factor in patients with HBV, was the strongest predictor of graft loss and death in patients with HCV, starting with donors40 years. Donor age60 years was the strongest predictor of graft loss and death in patients without viral hepatitis. The risks of graft loss and death were reduced for patients on tacrolimus-based immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil, regardless of disease etiology. There are clear differences in risk factors for poor outcomes based on underlying liver disease, particularly with regard to the impact of donor age.

Currently, allocation and distribution of organs are the most controversial aspects of liver transplantation. The scarcity of deceased donor organs has forced transplant centers and patients listed for transplant to compete with other local programs and locally listed patients, respectively, for liver grafts. The requirements for an optimal organ allocation system are (1) evidence-based outcome measures, (2) justice and equity, (3) maximal utility and (4) transparency. Balancing justice and equity for all candidates and individual vs. societal utility for a scarce resource is one of the largest challenges. The change in the allocation system from a waiting time-based system to a risk-based system using the Model for End stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has lowered pretransplant mortality, without adversely impacting posttransplant survival despite increased severity of illness at the time of transplantation (1,2). This is a model of how data-driven policy changes can improve outcomes. In this issue of the American Journal of Transplantation, Merion et al. present a detailed analysis of the scientific registry of transplant recipients to determine the transplant benefit for various MELD scores using time-dependent Cox regression models (3). Transplant benefit was defined as the difference in the likelihood of 1-year survival if one undergoes a transplant at a given MELD score vs. remaining on the waiting list. There is an overall survival benefit of transplantation in the first year; however, the benefit varied markedly by MELD score. A significant survival benefit with transplantation was seen only for patients with high MELD scores (i.e. >18); the survival benefit continuing to increase as MELD score increased, with greatest survival benefit being achieved in those at the highest MELD scores. Conversely, there was increased mortality in the first year posttransplant compared to remaining on the waiting list for patients with lower MELD scores (