Search

Background: The challenge of transplant waiting-lists is to provide organs for all candidates while maintaining efficiency and equity., Aims: We investigated the probability of being transplanted or of waiting-list dropout in Italy., Methods: Data from 12,749 adult patients waitlisted for primary liver-transplantation from January 2012 to December 2022 were collected from the National Transplant-Registry.The cohort was divided into Eras:1 (2012-2014);2 (2015-2018);and 3 (2019-2022)., Results: The one-year probability of undergoing transplant increased (67.6 % in Era 1vs73.8 % in Era 3,p < 0001) with a complementary 46 % decrease in waiting-list failures. Patients with hepatocellular-carcinoma were transplanted more often than cirrhotics[at model for end-stage liver-disease (MELD)-15:HR = 1.28,95 %CI:1.21-1.35;at MELD-25:HR = 1.04,95 %CI:0.92-1.19) and those with other indications (at MELD-15:HR = 1.27,95 %CI:1.11-1.46) across all eras. Candidates with Hepatitis-B-virus (HBV)related disease had a greater probability of transplant than those with Hepatitis-C virus-related (HR = 1.13,95 %CI:1.07-1.20), alcohol-related (HR = 1.13,95 %CI:1.05-1.21), and metabolic-related (HR = 1.18,95 %CI:1.09-1.28)disease. Waiting-list failures increased by 27 % every 5 MELD-points and by 14 % for every 5-year increase in recipient-age and decreased by 10 % with each 10-cm increase in stature. Blood-group O patients showed the highest probability of waiting-list failure (HR = 1.28,95 %CI:1.15-1.43)., Conclusions: Liver-transplantation waiting-list success-rates have significantly improved in Italy, with patients with hepatocellular-carcinoma and/or HBV-related diseases being favored. High MELD-score, old-age, short-stature, and blood-group O were significant risk-factors for waiting-list failure. Efforts to improve organ-allocation and prioritization-policies are underway., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Indefinite, long-term administration of hepatitis B immunoglobulins (HBIg), together with a third generation nucleos(t)ide analog (NA), is the currently recommended prophylactic strategy to prevent viral recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) for Hepatitis Delta virus (HDV)/Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related disease., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the safety and long-term clinical and virological outcomes of a consecutive cohort of 16 patients (10 males, median age 64.5, range 41-75) transplanted for HDV/HBV-related cirrhosis at our Institution, who discontinued HBIg after a median of 24.5 months (range 15-116) after transplant. All patients continued prophylaxis with same NA used before LT. Recurrence of HDV/HBV infection was defined as reappearance of serum HDV-RNA with detectable serum HBsAg and/or HBV-DNA., Results: The median follow-up after LT was 138 months (range 73-316) and 110 months (range 52-200) after HBIg withdrawal. All patients were HBsAg-positive, HBV-DNA negative, and anti-HDV positive at the time of LT and without coinfections with HCV or HIV. Patients were followed with biochemical and virological tests every 3-6 months after HBIg withdrawal. No recurrences of HDV/HBV infection or disease were observed during monoprophylaxis with NA. In addition, eight patients (50%) spontaneously developed anti-HBs titers above 10 IU/L at a median of 74 months (range 58-140) following HBIG discontinuation., Conclusions: HBIg withdrawal after LT is a safe and efficacious strategy in patients transplanted for HDV/HBV disease and is frequently associated with the spontaneous development of serological immunity against HBV. These data call for a revision of current prophylactic recommendations in this setting., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Over the last decades relevant epidemiological changes of liver diseases have occurred, together with greatly improved treatment opportunities., Aim: To investigate how the indications for elective adult liver transplantation and the underlying disease etiologies have evolved in Italy., Methods: We recruited from the National Transplant Registry a cohort comprising 17,317 adults patients waitlisted for primary liver transplantation from January-2004 to December-2020. Patients were divided into three Eras:1(2004-2011),2(2012-2014) and 3(2015-2020)., Results: Waitlistings for cirrhosis decreased from 65.9% in Era 1 to 46.1% in Era 3, while those for HCC increased from 28.7% to 48.7%. Comparing Eras 1 and 3, waitlistings for HCV-related cirrhosis decreased from 35.9% to 12.1%, yet those for HCV-related HCC increased from 8.5% to 26.7%. Waitlistings for HBV-related cirrhosis remained almost unchanged (13.2% and 12.4%), while those for HBV-related HCC increased from 4.0% to 11.6%. ALD-related cirrhosis decreased from 16.9% to 12.9% while ALD-related HCC increased from 1.9% to 3.9%., Conclusions: A sharp increase in liver transplant waitlisting for HCC and a concomitant decrease of waitlisting for cirrhosis have occurred In Italy. Despite HCV infection has noticeably decreased, still remains the primary etiology of waitlisting for HCC, while ALD and HBV represent the main causes for cirrhosis., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background & Aims: Missed or inappropriate referrals of potential candidates for liver transplantation (LT) are common and traditional referral methods (tRs) do not allow for efficient triage. We investigated the effects of a website developed for electronic outpatient referral to LT (eRW-LT) on these issues., Methods: We prospectively collected data on all consecutive outpatient referrals to 2 Italian LT centers from January 2015 to December 2019. In the second half of the study, starting from July 2017, referring physicians had the option of using eRW-LT, quickly obtaining the judgment on the appropriateness and urgency of the visit from a transplant hepatologist., Results: In the second half of the study, there were 99 eRW-LTs and 96 traditional referrals (new tRs), representing a 17.4% increase over the 161 traditional referrals (old tRs) of the first half. With eRW-LT, 11.1% of referrals were judged inappropriate online without booking a visit. Appropriateness, judged at the time of the first visit, was 59.6%, 56.2%, and 94.3% with old tRs, new tRs, and eRW-LT, respectively. Considering the appropriate visits, the median waiting time in days between referral date and first visit appointment was significantly shorter for urgent visits referred with eRW-LT (5.0; 95% CI, 4.8-9.3) compared with nonurgent visits sent with the same system (17.0; 95% CI, 11.5-25.0; P < .0001), those referred with old tRs (14.0; 95% CI, 8.0-23.0; P < .001) and with new tRs (16.0; 95% CI, 10.0-23.0; P < .001)., Conclusions: eRW-LT allows an increase in the number of referrals for LT, ensuring effective triage and better appropriateness of visits., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prophylaxis of HBV recurrence is critical after liver transplantation in HBV patients. Despite new prophylactic schemes, most European LT centres persist on a conservative approach combining hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ides analogues (NA)., Aim: This setting prompted the European Liver Intestine Transplantation Association (ELITA) to look for a consensus on the prevention of HBV recurrence., Methods: Based on a 4-round Delphi process, ELITA investigated 16 research questions and established 50 recommendations., Results: Prophylaxis should be driven according to 3 simplified risk groups: Low and high virological risk patients, with undetectable and detectable HBV DNA pre-LT, respectively, and special populations (HDV, HCC, poorly adherent patients). In low-risk patients, short-term (4 weeks) combination of third-generation NA+ HBIG, or third generation NA monotherapy can be considered as prophylactic options. In high-risk patients, HBIG can be discontinued once HBV DNA undetectable. Combined therapy for 1 year is advised. HBV-HCC patients should be treated according to their virological risk. In HDV/HBV patients, indefinite dual prophylaxis remains the gold standard. Full withdrawal of HBV prophylaxis following or not HBV vaccination should only be attempted in the setting of clinical trials. Organs from HBsAg+ve donors may be considered after assessment of risks, benefits, and patient consent. They should not be used if HDV is present. In poorly adherent patients, dual long-term prophylaxis is recommended. Budget impact analysis should be taken into account to drive prophylactic regimen., Conclusions: These ELITA recommendations should stimulate a more rational and homogeneous approach to HBV prophylaxis across LT programs., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Recent innovations in the field of liver transplantation have led to a wealth of new treatment regimes, with potential impact on the onset of de novo malignancies (DNM). The aim of this multicenter cohort study was to provide contemporary figures for the cumulative incidences of solid and hematological DNM after liver transplantation., Methods: We designed a retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing LT between 2000 and 2015 in three Italian transplant centers. Cumulative incidence was calculated by Kaplan-Meyer analysis., Results: The study included 789 LT patients with a median follow-up of 81 months (IQR: 38-124). The cumulative incidence of non-cutaneous DNM was 6.2% at 5-years, 11.6% at 10-years and 16.3% at 15-years. Post-Transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorders (PTLD) were demonstrated to have a cumulative incidence of 1.0% at 5-years, 1.6% at 10-years and 2.2% at 15-years. Solid Organ Tumors (SOT) demonstrated higher cumulative incidences - 5.3% at 5-years, 10.3% at 10-years and 14.4% at 15-years. The most frequently observed classifications of SOT were lung (rate 1.0% at 5-years, 2.5% at 10-years) and head & neck tumors (rate 1.3% at 5-years, 1.9% at 10-years)., Conclusions: Lung tumors and head & neck tumors are the most frequently observed SOT after LT., (Copyright © 2021 Fundación Clínica Médica Sur, A.C. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)