Back to Search
Start Over
A multicentre outcome analysis to define global benchmarks for donation after circulatory death liver transplantation.
- Source :
-
Journal of hepatology [J Hepatol] 2022 Feb; Vol. 76 (2), pp. 371-382. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Oct 14. - Publication Year :
- 2022
-
Abstract
- Background & Aims: The concept of benchmarking is established in the field of transplant surgery; however, benchmark values for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation are not available. Thus, we aimed to identify the best possible outcomes in DCD liver transplantation and to propose outcome reference values.<br />Methods: Based on 2,219 controlled DCD liver transplantations, collected from 17 centres in North America and Europe, we identified 1,012 low-risk, primary, adult liver transplantations with a laboratory MELD score of ≤20 points, receiving a DCD liver with a total donor warm ischemia time of ≤30 minutes and asystolic donor warm ischemia time of ≤15 minutes. Clinically relevant outcomes were selected and complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo-Grading and the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Corresponding benchmark cut-offs were based on median values of each centre, where the 75 <superscript>th</superscript> -percentile was considered.<br />Results: Benchmark cases represented between 19.7% and 75% of DCD transplantations in participating centres. The 1-year retransplant and mortality rates were 4.5% and 8.4% in the benchmark group, respectively. Within the first year of follow-up, 51.1% of recipients developed at least 1 major complication (≥Clavien-Dindo-Grade III). Benchmark cut-offs were ≤3 days and ≤16 days for ICU and hospital stay, ≤66% for severe recipient complications (≥Grade III), ≤16.8% for ischemic cholangiopathy, and ≤38.9 CCI points 1 year after transplant. Comparisons with higher risk groups showed more complications and impaired graft survival outside the benchmark cut-offs. Organ perfusion techniques reduced the complications to values below benchmark cut-offs, despite higher graft risk.<br />Conclusions: Despite excellent 1-year survival, morbidity in benchmark cases remains high. Benchmark cut-offs targeting morbidity parameters offer a valid tool to assess the protective value of new preservation technologies in higher risk groups and to provide a valid comparator cohort for future clinical trials.<br />Lay Summary: The best possible outcomes after liver transplantation of grafts donated after circulatory death (DCD) were defined using the concept of benchmarking. These were based on 2,219 liver transplantations following controlled DCD donation in 17 centres worldwide. Donor and recipient combinations with higher risk had significantly worse outcomes. However, the use of novel organ perfusion technology helped high-risk patients achieve similar outcomes as the benchmark cohort.<br />Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest that pertain to this work. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details.<br /> (Copyright © 2021 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)
- Subjects :
- Aged
Area Under Curve
Benchmarking methods
Benchmarking statistics & numerical data
Cohort Studies
Female
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Liver Transplantation methods
Liver Transplantation statistics & numerical data
Male
Middle Aged
Organ Dysfunction Scores
Outcome Assessment, Health Care methods
Postoperative Complications epidemiology
Postoperative Complications etiology
Proportional Hazards Models
ROC Curve
Shock epidemiology
Tissue and Organ Procurement methods
Tissue and Organ Procurement statistics & numerical data
Liver Transplantation adverse effects
Outcome Assessment, Health Care statistics & numerical data
Shock etiology
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1600-0641
- Volume :
- 76
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Journal of hepatology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 34655663
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2021.10.004