Search

Background: Despite high waiting list mortality rates, concern still exists on the appropriateness of using livers donated after circulatory death (DCD). We compared mortality and graft loss in recipients of livers donated after circulatory or brainstem death (DBD) across two successive time periods., Methods: Observational multinational data from the United Kingdom and Ireland were partitioned into two time periods (2008-2011 and 2012-2016). Cox regression methods were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing the impact of periods on post-transplant mortality and graft failure., Results: A total of 1176 DCD recipients and 3749 DBD recipients were included. Three-year patient mortality rates decreased markedly from 19.6 per cent in time period 1 to 10.4 per cent in time period 2 (adjusted HR 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.30 to 0.62; P < 0.001) for DCD recipients but only decreased from 12.8 to 11.3 per cent (adjusted HR 0.96, 95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 1.19; P = 0.732) in DBD recipients (P for interaction = 0.001). No time period-specific improvements in 3-year graft failure were observed for DCD (adjusted HR 0.80, 95% c.i. 0.61 to 1.05; P = 0.116) or DBD recipients (adjusted HR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.79 to 1.14; P = 0.607). A slight increase in retransplantation rates occurred between time period 1 and 2 in those who received a DCD liver (from 7.3 to 11.8 per cent; P = 0.042), but there was no change in those receiving a DBD liver (from 4.9 to 4.5 per cent; P = 0.365). In time period 2, no difference in mortality rates between those receiving a DCD liver and those receiving a DBD liver was observed (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% c.i. 0.56 to 1.09; P = 0.142)., Conclusion: Mortality rates more than halved in recipients of a DCD liver over a decade and eventually compared similarly to mortality rates in recipients of a DBD liver. Regions with high waiting list mortality may mitigate this by use of DCD livers., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Graft loss incidence is reported to be inversely related to recipient age. We used a national cohort of liver transplant (LT) recipients from the United Kingdom and Ireland to compare the age-dependent risk of graft failure in different post-transplantation time-periods ('epochs'). A cohort of first-time LT recipients (1995-2016) were identified (11 006). Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing graft loss between age-groups (18-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59 and 60-76 years) and graft loss in different post-transplant epochs: 0-90 days, 90 days-2 years and 2-10 years. The risk of graft failure was highest in those transplanted between age 18 and 29 (adjusted HR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.00-1.57, P = 0.04) and in those aged 30-39 (adjusted HR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11-1.55, P = 0.02). Graft failure in those under the age of 40 was similar in the first 90 days but worse 2-10 years' post-LT (18-29 years HR 1.36, 95% CI: 0.96-1.93, P < 0.001). Graft failure because of chronic rejection (CR) was more common in recipients aged 18-29 (P < 0.001). Adults transplanted between age 18 and 39 are at risk of late graft loss. CR is a concern for young adults (18-29 years). Our data highlights the need for specialist young adult services within adult healthcare., (© 2021 Steunstichting ESOT. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)