Dagmar Kollmann1, Svenja Maschke1, Susanne Rasoul-Rockenschaub2, Joanna Baron-Stefaniak3, Michael Hofmann1, Gerd Silberhumer1, Georg P Györi1, Thomas Soliman4, Gabriela A Berlakovich1. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 3. Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: thomas.soliman@meduniwien.ac.at.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) in elderly recipients is controversially discussed in the literature with only little data on long-term outcome available. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of LT in elderly recipients (>65 years). METHODS: Between 1989-2016, 139 patients >65 years-old were listed for liver transplantation, and 76 (55%) were transplanted. Patient outcome and characteristics were evaluated separately for the time period before (1989-2004) and after (2005-2016) MELD-implementation. Post-transplant outcome was compared between the elderly cohort and LT-recipients aged 18-65 years (n = 1395). RESULTS: Overall survival of patients >65 years was better in the MELD-era compared to the earlier period (1- and 5-year-survival: 73%, 60% vs. 69%, 37%, respectively; p = 0.055). The main differences between the two groups included higher recipient age (p = 0.001) and BMI (p = 0.001), higher donor age (p < 0.001), less need of intraoperative red blood cells (p = 0.008) and a lower number of postoperative rejections (p = 0.03) after 2004. Comparing the overall survival of patients transplanted in the MELD-era aged 18-65 years vs. >65 years displayed comparable 1- and 5 year-survival rates (81%, 68% vs. 73% and 60%, respectively, p = 0.558). CONCLUSION: In the modern era, outcome of patients receiving LT with >65 years is comparable to <65 year-old patients. After careful evaluation, patients >65 years old should be considered for LT.
BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) in elderly recipients is controversially discussed in the literature with only little data on long-term outcome available. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of LT in elderly recipients (>65 years). METHODS: Between 1989-2016, 139 patients >65 years-old were listed for liver transplantation, and 76 (55%) were transplanted. Patient outcome and characteristics were evaluated separately for the time period before (1989-2004) and after (2005-2016) MELD-implementation. Post-transplant outcome was compared between the elderly cohort and LT-recipients aged 18-65 years (n = 1395). RESULTS: Overall survival of patients >65 years was better in the MELD-era compared to the earlier period (1- and 5-year-survival: 73%, 60% vs. 69%, 37%, respectively; p = 0.055). The main differences between the two groups included higher recipient age (p = 0.001) and BMI (p = 0.001), higher donor age (p < 0.001), less need of intraoperative red blood cells (p = 0.008) and a lower number of postoperative rejections (p = 0.03) after 2004. Comparing the overall survival of patients transplanted in the MELD-era aged 18-65 years vs. >65 years displayed comparable 1- and 5 year-survival rates (81%, 68% vs. 73% and 60%, respectively, p = 0.558). CONCLUSION: In the modern era, outcome of patients receiving LT with >65 years is comparable to <65 year-old patients. After careful evaluation, patients >65 years old should be considered for LT.
Authors: Burcin Ekser; William C Goggins; Jonathan A Fridell; Plamen Mihaylov; Richard S Mangus; Andrew J Lutz; Daiki Soma; Marwan S Ghabril; Marco A Lacerda; John A Powelson; Chandrashekhar A Kubal Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2020-05-28