Rachel Hogen1, Michelle Kim1, Yelim Lee2, Mary Lo3, Navpreet Kaur1, Jeff Kahn4, Shefali Chopra4, Yasir Qazi5, Ashraf Sedra6, Jim Kim1, Lauren O'Brien4, Yuri Genyk1, Linda Sher1, Juliet Emamaullee7. 1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Abdominal Organ Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 2. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 5. Department of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 6. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 7. Division of Hepatobiliary and Abdominal Organ Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: Juliet.emamaullee@med.usc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) develop chronic liver disease via etiologies including sickle cell hepatopathy, acquired viral hepatitis, or secondary hemochromatosis. It is unclear how many patients with SCD ultimately undergo liver transplantation (LT) and what factors are associated with survival after LT. In this study, we examined LT outcomes in these patients by reviewing the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) and our institutional experience. METHODS: Analysis of the SRTR identified 23 LT recipients and five simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation (SLKT) recipients with SCD. Patient demographics and graft and patient survival were analyzed. Two patients with SCD at our institution underwent SLKT. RESULTS: Review of the SRTR revealed that recipients with SCD had significantly higher model for end-stage liver disease scores (33 versus 21, P = 0.004), preoperative intensive care unit admission (43.5% versus 19.1%, P = 0.007), preoperative dialysis (17.4% versus 4.9%, P = 0.009), and were more likely to be status 1 (26.1% versus 12.1%, P = 0.041) when compared with the reference population of African American LT recipients. Despite being higher risk at the time of LT, patients with SCD had equivalent posttransplant graft and patient survival when compared with the reference population (P = 0.5 and P = 0.2, respectively) and a 2:1 propensity score-matched group (P = 0.5 and P = 0.2, respectively). Two recent SLKT recipients with SCD from our institution have performed well with stable allograft function. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the SRTR demonstrate that patients with SCD can expect equivalent graft and patient survival after LT despite exhibiting more comorbidities at the time of LT. The low number of patients with SCD who underwent LT in the SRTR in comparison with the rate of chronic liver disease in this population raises the question as to whether a disparity in access to LT exists for this complex population.
BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) develop chronic liver disease via etiologies including sickle cell hepatopathy, acquired viral hepatitis, or secondary hemochromatosis. It is unclear how many patients with SCD ultimately undergo liver transplantation (LT) and what factors are associated with survival after LT. In this study, we examined LT outcomes in these patients by reviewing the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) and our institutional experience. METHODS: Analysis of the SRTR identified 23 LT recipients and five simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation (SLKT) recipients with SCD. Patient demographics and graft and patient survival were analyzed. Two patients with SCD at our institution underwent SLKT. RESULTS: Review of the SRTR revealed that recipients with SCD had significantly higher model for end-stage liver disease scores (33 versus 21, P = 0.004), preoperative intensive care unit admission (43.5% versus 19.1%, P = 0.007), preoperative dialysis (17.4% versus 4.9%, P = 0.009), and were more likely to be status 1 (26.1% versus 12.1%, P = 0.041) when compared with the reference population of African American LT recipients. Despite being higher risk at the time of LT, patients with SCD had equivalent posttransplant graft and patient survival when compared with the reference population (P = 0.5 and P = 0.2, respectively) and a 2:1 propensity score-matched group (P = 0.5 and P = 0.2, respectively). Two recent SLKT recipients with SCD from our institution have performed well with stable allograft function. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the SRTR demonstrate that patients with SCD can expect equivalent graft and patient survival after LT despite exhibiting more comorbidities at the time of LT. The low number of patients with SCD who underwent LT in the SRTR in comparison with the rate of chronic liver disease in this population raises the question as to whether a disparity in access to LT exists for this complex population.
Authors: Matthew M Baichi; Razi M Arifuddin; Parvez S Mantry; Adel Bozorgzadeh; Charlotte Ryan Journal: Transplantation Date: 2005-12-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Harini A Chakkera; Yogish C Kudva; Yu-Hui H Chang; Raymond L Heilman; Andrew L Singer; Amit K Mathur; Winston R Hewitt; Hasan A Khamash; Janna L Huskey; Nitin N Katariya; Adyr A Moss; Senaida Behmen; Kunam S Reddy Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Margaux N Mustian; Brittany A Shelton; Paul A MacLennan; Rhiannon D Reed; Jared A White; Devin E Eckhoff; Jayme E Locke; Richard M Allman; Stephen H Gray Journal: Transplantation Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Morey A Blinder; B Geng; Mauricio Lisker-Melman; Jeffrey S Crippin; Kevin Korenblat; William Chapman; Shalini Shenoy; Joshua J Field Journal: Hematol Rep Date: 2013-05-02