Adult Liver Transplants (adult + liver_transplant)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Terms modified by Adult Liver Transplants

  • adult liver transplant recipient

  • Selected Abstracts

    The biopsied donor liver: Incorporating macrosteatosis into high-risk donor assessment,

    Austin L. Spitzer
    To expand the donor liver pool, ways are sought to better define the limits of marginally transplantable organs. The Donor Risk Index (DRI) lists 7 donor characteristics, together with cold ischemia time and location of the donor, as risk factors for graft failure. We hypothesized that donor hepatic steatosis is an additional independent risk factor. We analyzed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for all adult liver transplants performed from October 1, 2003, through February 6, 2008, with grafts from deceased donors to identify donor characteristics and procurement logistics parameters predictive of decreased graft survival. A proportional hazard model of donor variables, including percent steatosis from higher-risk donors, was created with graft survival as the primary outcome. Of 21,777 transplants, 5051 donors had percent macrovesicular steatosis recorded on donor liver biopsy. Compared to the 16,726 donors with no recorded liver biopsy, the donors with biopsied livers had a higher DRI, were older and more obese, and a higher percentage died from anoxia or stroke than from head trauma. The donors whose livers were biopsied became our study group. Factors most strongly associated with graft failure at 1 year after transplantation with livers from this high-risk donor group were donor age, donor liver macrovesicular steatosis, cold ischemia time, and donation after cardiac death status. In conclusion, in a high-risk donor group, macrovesicular steatosis is an independent risk factor for graft survival, along with other factors of the DRI including donor age, donor race, donation after cardiac death status, and cold ischemia time. Liver Transpl 16:874,884, 2010. © 2010 AASLD. [source]

    Liver transplantation at the extremes of the body mass index,

    André A. S. Dick
    Controversies exist regarding the morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing liver transplantation at the extremes of the body mass index (BMI). A review of the United Network for Organ Sharing database from 1987 through 2007 revealed 73,538 adult liver transplants. Patients were stratified into 6 BMI categories established by the World Health Organization: underweight, <18.5 kg/m2; normal weight, 18.5 to <25 kg/m2; overweight, 25 to <30 kg/m2; obese, 30 to <35 kg/m2; severely obese, 35 to <40 kg/m2; and very severely obese, ,40 kg/m2. Survival rates were compared among these 6 categories via Kaplan-Meier survival curves with the log-rank test. The underweight and very severely obese groups had significantly lower survival. There were 1827 patients in the underweight group, 1447 patients in the very severely obese group, and 68,172 patients in the other groups, which became the control. Groups with extreme BMI (<18.5 and ,40) were compared to the control to assess significant differences. Underweight patients were more likely to die from hemorrhagic complications (P < 0.002) and cerebrovascular accidents (P < 0.04). When compared with the control, the very severely obese patients had a higher number of infectious complications and cancer events (P = 0.02) leading to death. In 3 different eras of liver transplantation, multivariable analysis showed that underweight and very severe obesity were significant predictors of death. In conclusion, liver transplantation holds increased risk for patients at the extremes of BMI. Identifying these patients and instituting aggressive new policies may improve outcomes. Liver Transpl 15:968,977, 2009. © 2009 AASLD. [source]

    Resolution of alcoholic neuropathy following liver transplantation

    Edward Gane
    Between 10 and 20% of adult liver transplants are performed for end-stage alcoholic liver disease. Severe extrahepatic end-organ damage from alcoholism (cardiomyopathy, pancreatitis, central nervous system injury, and neuropathy) is widely regarded as an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation, despite a lack of data on the effect of transplantation on these complications. We describe such a patient who presented with decompensated alcoholic liver disease and moderately severe peripheral neuropathy. Both his liver failure and neuropathy progressed despite 9 months abstinence and intensive nutritional support. By 12 months post-transplant, however, this patient had regained almost normal muscle strength, with associated recovery in sensory and motor conduction velocities. Direct alcohol toxicity, nutritional and vitamin deficiencies, and liver failure were all likely etiologic factors in this patient's neuropathy. In conclusion, this case suggests that peripheral neuropathy in a patient with alcoholic cirrhosis may resolve following liver transplantation and should not constitute a contraindication to transplantation, even when it is disabling. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:1545,1548.) [source]

    Resource Utilization of Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Is Similar at an Experienced Transplant Center

    J. C. Lai
    Although living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been shown to decrease waiting-list mortality, little is known of its financial impact relative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). We performed a retrospective cohort study of the comprehensive resource utilization, using financial charges as a surrogate measure,from the pretransplant through the posttransplant periods,of 489 adult liver transplants (LDLT n = 86; DDLT n = 403) between January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2006, at a single center with substantial experience in LDLT. Baseline characteristics differed between LDLT versus DDLT with regards to age at transplantation (p = 0.02), male gender (p < 0.01), percentage Caucasians (p < 0.01) and transplant model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (p < 0.01). In univariate analysis, there was a trend toward decreased total transplant charges with LDLT (p = 0.06), despite increased surgical charges associated with LDLT (p < 0.01). After adjustment for the covariates that were associated with financial charges, there was no significant difference in total transplant charges (p = 0.82). MELD score at transplant was the strongest driver of resource utilization. We conclude that at an experienced transplant center, LDLT imposes a similar overall financial burden than DDLT, despite the increased complexity of living donor surgery and the addition of the costs of the living donor. We speculate that LDLT optimizes transplantation by transplanting healthier and younger recipients. [source]