Search

With the increasing number of accepted candidates on waiting lists worldwide, there is an urgent need to expand the number and the quality of donor livers. Dynamic preservation approaches have demonstrated various benefits, including improving liver function and graft survival, and reducing liver injury and post-transplant complications. Consequently, organ perfusion techniques are being used in clinical practice in many countries. Despite this success, a proportion of livers do not meet current viability tests required for transplantation, even with the use of modern perfusion techniques. Therefore, devices are needed to further optimise machine liver perfusion - one promising option is to prolong machine liver perfusion for several days, with ex situ treatment of perfused livers. For example, stem cells, senolytics, or molecules targeting mitochondria or downstream signalling can be administered during long-term liver perfusion to modulate repair mechanisms and regeneration. Besides, today's perfusion equipment is also designed to enable the use of various liver bioengineering techniques, to develop scaffolds or for their re-cellularisation. Cells or entire livers can also undergo gene modulation to modify animal livers for xenotransplantation, to directly treat injured organs or to repopulate such scaffolds with "repaired" autologous cells. This review first discusses current strategies to improve the quality of donor livers, and secondly reports on bioengineering techniques to design optimised organs during machine perfusion. Current practice, as well as the benefits and challenges associated with these different perfusion strategies are discussed., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Primary non-function and ischaemic cholangiopathy are the most feared complications following donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD) liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to design a new score on risk assessment in liver-transplantation DCD based on donor-and-recipient parameters., Methods: Using the UK national DCD database, a risk analysis was performed in adult recipients of DCD liver grafts in the UK between 2000 and 2015 (n = 1,153). A new risk score was calculated (UK DCD Risk Score) on the basis of a regression analysis. This is validated using the United Network for Organ Sharing database (n = 1,617) and our own DCD liver-transplant database (n = 315). Finally, the new score was compared with two other available prediction systems: the DCD risk scores from the University of California, Los Angeles and King's College Hospital, London., Results: The following seven strongest predictors of DCD graft survival were identified: functional donor warm ischaemia, cold ischaemia, recipient model for end-stage liver disease, recipient age, donor age, previous orthotopic liver transplantation, and donor body mass index. A combination of these risk factors (UK DCD risk model) stratified the best recipients in terms of graft survival in the entire UK DCD database, as well as in the United Network for Organ Sharing and in our own DCD population. Importantly, the UK DCD Risk Score significantly predicted graft loss caused by primary non-function or ischaemic cholangiopathy in the futile group (>10 score points). The new prediction model demonstrated a better C statistic of 0.79 compared to the two other available systems (0.71 and 0.64, respectively)., Conclusions: The UK DCD Risk Score is a reliable tool to detect high-risk and futile combinations of donor-and-recipient factors in DCD liver transplantation. It is simple to use and offers a great potential for making better decisions on which DCD graft should be rejected or may benefit from functional assessment and further optimization by machine perfusion., Lay Summary: In this study, we provide a new prediction model for graft loss in donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD) liver transplantation. Based on UK national data, the new UK DCD Risk Score involves the following seven clinically relevant risk factors: donor age, donor body mass index, functional donor warm ischaemia, cold storage, recipient age, recipient laboratory model for end-stage liver disease, and retransplantation. Three risk classes were defined: low risk (0-5 points), high risk (6-10 points), and futile (>10 points). This new model stratified best in terms of graft survival compared to other available models. Futile combinations (>10 points) achieved an only very limited 1- and 5-year graft survival of 37% and less than 20%, respectively. In contrast, an excellent graft survival has been shown in low-risk combinations (≤5 points). The new model is easy to calculate at the time of liver acceptance. It may help to decide which risk combination will benefit from additional graft treatment, or which DCD liver should be declined for a certain recipient., (Copyright © 2017 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: The role of liver transplantation in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in livers without fibrosis/cirrhosis (NC-HCC) is unclear. We aimed to determine selection criteria for liver transplantation in patients with NC-HCC., Methods: Using the European Liver Transplant Registry, we identified 105 patients who underwent liver transplantation for unresectable NC-HCC. Detailed information about patient, tumor characteristics, and survival was obtained from the transplant centers. Variables associated with survival were identified using univariate and multivariate statistical analyses., Results: Liver transplantation was primary treatment in 62 patients and rescue therapy for intrahepatic recurrences after liver resection in 43. Median number of tumors was 3 (range 1-7) and median tumor size 8 cm (range 0.5-30). One- and 5-year overall and tumor-free survival rates were 84% and 49% and 76% and 43%, respectively. Macrovascular invasion (HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.86), lymph node involvement (HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.28 to 5.28), and time interval between liver resection and transplantation < 12 months (HR 2.12, 95% CI 0.96 to 4.67) were independently associated with survival. Five-year survival in patients without macrovascular invasion or lymph node involvement was 59% (95% CI 47-70%). Tumor size was not associated with survival., Conclusions: This is the largest reported series of patients transplanted for NC-HCC. Selection of patients without macrovascular invasion or lymph node involvement, or patients ≥ 12months after previous liver resection, can result in 5-year survival rates of 59%. In contrast to HCC in cirrhosis, tumor size is not a predictor of post-transplant survival in NC-HCC., (Copyright © 2012 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)