Jurgis Alvikas1, Andrew-Paul Deeb2, Dana R Jorgensen3, Marta I Minervini4, Anthony J Demetris4, Kristina Lemon3, Xilin Chen2, Hanna Labiner5, Shahid Malik6, Christopher Hughes3, Abhinav Humar3, Amit Tevar3. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: alvikasj2@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Division of Abdominal Transplantation Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Division of Liver and Transplant Pathology, Department of Anatomic Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 5. School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 6. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Whether moderately macrosteatotic livers (30%-60%) represent a risk for worsened graft function is controversial. The uncertainty, in large part, is owing to the heterogeneous steatosis grading. Our aim was to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of moderately macrosteatotic allografts that were graded according to a standardized institutional protocol. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of transplants performed between 1994 and 2014. All patients with allografts biopsied pretransplantation were included. Relevant donor and recipient variable were recorded. Moderately macrosteatotic livers were compared with mildly macrosteatotic and nonsteatotic livers. Primary outcomes of interest were patient survival at 90 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Cox regression analyses were carried out to compare survival between the 2 groups. RESULTS: We compared 65 allografts with moderate macrosteatosis and 810 with no or mild macrosteatosis. Patients with moderately macrosteatotic allografts were 2.69 times as likely to die within the first 90 days after transplant (75.1% vs 91.6% survival) after adjusting for donor age, donor race, recipient age, recipient race, recipient body mass index, recipient diabetes, presence of hepatocellular carcinoma, days on waitlist, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score at transplantation, cold ischemia time. However, for recipients who survive 90 days, moderately macrosteatotic allografts had comparable long-term survival. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that moderate macrosteatosis is a strong predictor of early but not late mortality. Further studies are needed to distinguish the specific cohort of patients for whom moderately macrosteatotic allografts will lead to acceptable outcomes.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Whether moderately macrosteatotic livers (30%-60%) represent a risk for worsened graft function is controversial. The uncertainty, in large part, is owing to the heterogeneous steatosis grading. Our aim was to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of moderately macrosteatotic allografts that were graded according to a standardized institutional protocol. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of transplants performed between 1994 and 2014. All patients with allografts biopsied pretransplantation were included. Relevant donor and recipient variable were recorded. Moderately macrosteatotic livers were compared with mildly macrosteatotic and nonsteatotic livers. Primary outcomes of interest were patient survival at 90 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Cox regression analyses were carried out to compare survival between the 2 groups. RESULTS: We compared 65 allografts with moderate macrosteatosis and 810 with no or mild macrosteatosis. Patients with moderately macrosteatotic allografts were 2.69 times as likely to die within the first 90 days after transplant (75.1% vs 91.6% survival) after adjusting for donor age, donor race, recipient age, recipient race, recipient body mass index, recipient diabetes, presence of hepatocellular carcinoma, days on waitlist, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score at transplantation, cold ischemia time. However, for recipients who survive 90 days, moderately macrosteatotic allografts had comparable long-term survival. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that moderate macrosteatosis is a strong predictor of early but not late mortality. Further studies are needed to distinguish the specific cohort of patients for whom moderately macrosteatotic allografts will lead to acceptable outcomes.
Authors: S Todo; A J Demetris; L Makowka; L Teperman; L Podesta; T Shaver; A Tzakis; T E Starzl Journal: Transplantation Date: 1989-05 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Chris Estes; Quentin M Anstee; Maria Teresa Arias-Loste; Heike Bantel; Stefano Bellentani; Joan Caballeria; Massimo Colombo; Antonio Craxi; Javier Crespo; Christopher P Day; Yuichiro Eguchi; Andreas Geier; Loreta A Kondili; Daniela C Kroy; Jeffrey V Lazarus; Rohit Loomba; Michael P Manns; Giulio Marchesini; Atsushi Nakajima; Francesco Negro; Salvatore Petta; Vlad Ratziu; Manuel Romero-Gomez; Arun Sanyal; Jörn M Schattenberg; Frank Tacke; Junko Tanaka; Christian Trautwein; Lai Wei; Stefan Zeuzem; Homie Razavi Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: Stefanie Bertram; Cathrin Myland; Sandra Swoboda; Anja Gallinat; Thomas Minor; Nils Lehmann; Michael Thie; Julia Kälsch; Leona Pott; Ali Canbay; Thomas Bajanowski; Henning Reis; Andreas Paul; Hideo A Baba Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2016-12-03 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: R J Ploeg; A M D'Alessandro; S J Knechtle; M D Stegall; J D Pirsch; R M Hoffmann; T Sasaki; H W Sollinger; F O Belzer; M Kalayoglu Journal: Transplantation Date: 1993-04 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Hasan Yersiz; Coney Lee; Fady M Kaldas; Johnny C Hong; Abbas Rana; Gabriel T Schnickel; Jason A Wertheim; Ali Zarrinpar; Vatche G Agopian; Jeffrey Gornbein; Bita V Naini; Charles R Lassman; Ronald W Busuttil; Henrik Petrowsky Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2013-03-17 Impact factor: 5.799