Liver Transplantation最新文献

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major complication of liver transplantation (LT) associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Knowing the drivers of post-LT kidney dysfunction-with a granular focus on the type, duration, and severity of pre-LT kidney disease-can highlight intervention opportunities and inform dual-organ allocation policies. We retrospectively analyzed predictors of safety net kidney after liver transplant (KALT) eligibility and kidney replacement therapy (KRT) for > 14 days after LT. Among 557 recipients of adult deceased-donor LT, 49% had normal kidney function, 25% had acute kidney injury (AKI), and 25% had CKD±AKI at the time of LT. A total of 36 (6.5%) qualified for KALT and 63 (11%) required KRT > 14 days. In univariable analysis, factors associated with KALT eligibility and KRT > 14 days, respectively, included stage 3 AKI (OR 7.87; OR 7.06), CKD±AKI (OR 4.58; OR 4.22), CKD III-V duration (OR 1.10 per week; OR 1.06 per week), and increasing CKD stage (stage III: OR 3.90, IV: OR 5.24, V: OR 16.8; stage III: OR 2.23, IV: OR 3.62, V: OR 19.4). AKI stage I-II and AKI duration in the absence of CKD were not associated with the outcomes. Pre-LT KRT had a robust impact on KALT eligibility (OR 4.00 per week) and prolonged post-LT KRT (OR 5.22 per week), with 19.8% of patients who received any pre-LT KRT ultimately qualifying for KALT. Eligibility for KALT was similar between those who received 0 days and ≤ 14 days of KRT after LT (2.1% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.53). In conclusion, the type, duration, and severity of pre-LT kidney dysfunction have unique impacts on post-LT kidney-related morbidity, and future research must use these novel classifications to study mitigation strategies.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently complicates the course of hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and negatively affects their prognosis. How AKI response influences the timing of liver transplantation (LT) remains unclear. We sought to assess the impact of AKI response to treatment on survival and LT rates in patients with cirrhosis awaiting LT. This was a retrospective multicenter study of cirrhosis patients waitlisted for LT and hospitalized with AKI in 2019. The exposure was AKI response versus no response during hospitalization. Outcomes were 90-day overall and transplant-free survival, and rates of LT with time to transplant. We adjusted for age, sex, race, cirrhosis etiology, site, and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium (MELD-Na) score. Among the 317 patients in this study, 170 had an AKI response (53.6%), and 147 had no response (46.4%). Compared to nonresponders, responders had better 90-day overall survival (89.4% vs. 76.2%, adjusted subhazard ratio for mortality 0.34, p =0.001), and transplant-free survival (63.5% vs. 25.2%, aHR for probability of death or transplant 0.35, p <0.001). The LT rate was lower in responders (45.9% vs. 61.2%, adjusted subhazard ratio 0.55, p =0.005); 79% of transplants in responders occurred after discharge, at a median of 103 days, while 62% of transplants in nonresponders occurred during hospitalization, with the remainder occurring postdischarge at a median of 58 days. In patients with cirrhosis waitlisted for LT who are hospitalized with AKI, AKI response to therapy is associated with improved 90-day survival, despite a reduced LT rate and longer time to LT.

Liver transplantation (LT) is the most successful treatment for patients with decompensated cirrhosis. The availability of effective and safe etiological treatments has altered the natural history of decompensated cirrhosis. Recently, the concept of recompensation has been defined. Patients who achieve recompensation may be removed from the waiting list for LT. Therefore, achieving an etiological cure is the cornerstone in the treatment of patients with decompensated cirrhosis. However, most patients improve their liver function after an etiologic cure, and only a proportion of patients achieve true recompensation after an etiological cure. Some patients maintain a condition of "MELD purgatory," that is, an improvement in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score without relevant clinical improvement that prevents delisting and may be even detrimental because lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score delays LT. Herein, we review the available evidence regarding recompensation and the management of recompensated patients on the waiting list for LT.

Psychiatric disorders after liver transplantation (LT) are associated with worse patient and graft outcomes, which may be amplified by inadequate treatment. We aimed to characterize the burden of psychiatric disorders, treatment patterns, and associated financial burden among liver transplantation recipients (LTRs). IQVIA PharMetrics (R) Plus for Academics-a large health plan claims database representative of the commercially insured US population-was used to identify psychiatric diagnoses among adult LTRs and assess treatment. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with post-LT psychiatric diagnoses and receipt of pharmacotherapy. Patient financial liability was estimated using adjudicated medical/pharmacy claims for LTRs with and without psychiatric diagnoses. Post-LT psychiatric diagnoses were identified in 395 (29.5%) of 1338 LTRs, of which 106 (26.8%) were incident cases. Treatment varied, with 67.3% receiving pharmacotherapy, 32.1% psychotherapy, 21.0% combination therapy, and 21.5% no treatment. Among 340 LTRs on psychotropic medications before transplant, 24% did not continue them post-LT. Post-LT psychiatric diagnoses were independently associated with female sex, alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), prolonged LT hospitalization (>2 wk), and pre-LT psychiatric diagnosis. Incident psychiatric diagnoses were associated with female sex, ALD, and prolonged LT hospitalization. Patients with a post-LT psychiatric diagnosis had higher rates of hospitalization (89.6% vs. 81.5%, p <0.001) and financial liability (median $5.5K vs. $4.6K USD, p =0.006). Having a psychiatric diagnosis post-LT was independently associated with experiencing high financial liability >$5K. Over 1 in 4 LTRs had a psychiatric diagnosis in a large national cohort, yet nearly a quarter received no treatment. LTRs with psychiatric diagnoses experienced increased health care utilization and higher financial liability. Sociodemographic and clinical risk factors could inform high-risk subgroups who may benefit from screening and mitigation strategies.

The Liver Simulated Allocation Model (LSAM) is used to evaluate proposed organ allocation policies. Although LSAM has been shown to predict the directionality of changes in transplants and nonused organs, the magnitude is often overestimated. One reason is that policymakers and researchers using LSAM assume static levels of organ donation and center behavior because of challenges with predicting future behavior. We sought to assess the ability of LSAM to account for changes in organ donation and organ acceptance behavior using LSAM 2019. We ran 1-year simulations with the default model and then ran simulations changing donor arrival rates (ie, organ donation) and center acceptance behavior. Changing the donor arrival rate was associated with a progressive simulated increase in transplants, with corresponding simulated decreases in waitlist deaths. Changing parameters related to organ acceptance was associated with important changes in transplants, nonused organs, and waitlist deaths in the expected direction in data simulations, although to a much lesser degree than changing the donor arrival rate. Increasing the donor arrival rate was associated with a marked decrease in the travel distance of donor livers in simulations. In conclusion, we demonstrate that LSAM can account for changes in organ donation and organ acceptance in a manner aligned with historical precedent that can inform future policy analyses. As Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients develops new simulation programs, the importance of considering changes in donation and center practice is critical to accurately estimate the impact of new allocation policies.