Search

Background: Patients with mental illnesses face unique disparities in access to liver transplantation. We sought to compare rates of evaluation, transplantation, and post-transplant outcomes among patients with and without mental illnesses. Methods: Patients aged 18–75 with decompensated cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma were identified from the Medicare Standard Analytic Files from 2014-2020. Regression analyses were used to examine the association between mental illness and evaluation by a transplant surgeon, receipt of transplant, and post-transplant outcomes. Results: Among 274,252 liver transplant candidates, 34,269 (12.5%) patients had depression and/or anxiety disorders and 8,184 (3.0%) had severe mental illnesses. The proportion of patients evaluated by a transplant surgeon was lower among patients with severe mental illnesses (14.1%), as well as individuals with depression and/or anxiety disorders (16.0%) versus the general population (18.5%) (p < 0.001). Similarly, utilization of transplantation rates was lower among patients with severe mental illness (1.1%) compared with depression and/or anxiety disorders (2.0%), as well as individuals without mental illnesses (3.8%) (p < 0.001). On multivariable regression analyses, mental illness remained independently associated with lower odds of evaluation and transplantation among patients with mental illnesses. In contrast, on adjusted analyses there were no differences in postoperative outcomes including perioperative complications, biliary complications, graft rejection, graft failure, and overall survival. Conclusion: Despite lower rates of evaluation and transplant, patients with mental illnesses did not experience differences in most postoperative outcomes compared with patients without a mental illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Liver transplantation (LT) has been considered a potential curative treatment for patients with very early intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and cirrhosis, yet the survival benefit of LT has not been well defined. This study aimed to compare the long-term survival outcomes of patients who underwent LT with that of individuals who received resection and non-curative intent treatment (non-CIT). Methods: Patients who underwent LT, hepatectomy, and non-CIT between 2004 and 2018 were included in the National Cancer Database. Survival benefits of LT over resection and non-CIT were analyzed relative to overall survival (OS). Results: Among 863 patients, 54 (6.3%) underwent LT, while 342 (39.6%) underwent surgical resection, and 467 (54.1%) received non-CIT, respectively. While the rates of non-CIT increased over time, the percentages of LT remained consistent during the study period. LT patients had similar 5-year OS to individuals who underwent resection (referent, resection: LT, HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.84–1.58, p=0.84). In contrast, 5-year OS was better among patients who underwent LT versus individuals who had non-CIT after controlling other variables using propensity score overlapping weighting (5-year OS, LT 57.1% vs. LR 25.8%, p<0.001). Conclusions: The outcomes of very early ICC patients who underwent LT were similar to individuals who underwent hepatectomy, but better than patients treated with non-CIT. LT should be may be a consideration as a treatment option for patients with early stage ICC who are unsuitable candidates for resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]