Donation after cardiac death liver transplantation is marred by inferior outcomes including higher rates of biliary complications and IC as well as increased mortality and graft failure. Despite current federal mandates to increase DCD donation, these serious complications translate into poor outcomes for individuals and increased healthcare costs. These risks should be considered in decisions regarding the utilization of these grafts.
Background & Aims: Frailty is associated with mortality in patients with cirrhosis. We measured frailty using 3 simple tests and calculated liver frailty index (LFI) scores for patients at multiple ambulatory centers. We investigated associations between LFI scores, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and mortality. Methods: Adults without hepatocellular carcinoma who were on the liver transplant waitlist at 9 centers in the United States (n=1044) were evaluated using the LFI; LFI scores of 4.5 or more indicated that patients were frail. We performed logistic regression analyses to assess associations between frailty and ascites or HE and competing risk regression analyses (with liver transplantation as the competing risk) to estimate subhazard ratios (sHR) of waitlist mortality (death or removal from the waitlist). Results: Of study subjects, 36% had ascites, 41% had HE, and 25% were frail. The odds of frailty were higher for patients with ascites (adjusted odd ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15-2.14) or HE (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.80-3.33) than without these features. Higher proportions of frail patients with ascites (29%) or HE (30%) died while on the waitlist compared to patients who were not frail (17% of patients with ascites and 20% with HE). In univariable analysis, ascites (sHR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.05), HE (sHR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.38-2.45), and frailty (sHR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.77-3.20) were associated with waitlist mortality. In adjusted models, only frailty remained significantly associated with waitlist mortality (sHR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.31-2.52)-ascites and HE were not. Conclusions: Frailty is a prevalent complication of cirrhosis that is observed more frequently in patients with ascites or HE and independently associated with waitlist mortality. LFI scores can be Lai et al.
Background and Aims
Organ scarcity has resulted in increased utilization of donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors. Prior analysis of patient survival following DCD liver transplantation has been restricted to single institution cohorts and a limited national experience. We compared the current national experience with DCD and DBD livers to better understand survival after transplantation.
Methods
We compared 1,113 DCD and 42,254 DBD recipients from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database between 1996 and 2007. Patient survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methodology and Cox regression.
Results
DCD recipients experienced worse patient survival compared to DBD recipients (p<0.001). One and three year survival was 82% and 71% for DCD compared to 86% and 77% for DBD recipients. Moreover, DCD recipients required re-transplantation more frequently (DCD 14.7% versus DBD 6.8%, p<0.001), and re-transplantation survival was markedly inferior to survival after primary transplant irrespective of graft type. Amplification of mortality risk was observed when DCD was combined with cold ischemia time > 12hours (HR=1.81), shared organs (HR=1.69), recipient hepatocellular carcinoma (HR=1.80), recipient age >60 years (HR=1.92), and recipient renal insufficiency (HR=1.82).
Conclusions
DCD recipients experience signficantly worse patient survival after transplantation. This increased risk of mortality is comparable in magnitude to, but often exacerbated by other well-established risk predictors. Utilization decisions should carefully consider DCD graft risks in combination with these other factors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.