Common search

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Book on hepatitis from page 364 to 375

Book on hepatitis from page 364 to 375

364  Hepatology 2012
clinical and virologic LAM resistance were excluded. Combined nucleos(t)ide
analog treatment started upon wait-listing. The median duration of antiviral therapy
prior to LT was 3.6 months. HBIG (800 IU IM) was administered for only one week
post-transplant. During the study, 19 patients were transplanted, and of those, none
had recurrent HBV during a median follow-up of 11.7 months.
Figure 6. Prophylaxis of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Combined use of
nucleos(t)ide analog(s) and hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) is the current gold standard for
prophylaxis of HBV reinfection after LT. HBIG therapy can be withdrawn in the long term after
LT in selected low-risk (HbsAg-negative) cases. Those who are anti-hepatitis B core (anti-HBc)-positive and without detectable anti-hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) titers or anti-HBs titers <100
IU/L should be vaccinated according to the German Guidelines (Cornberg 2011). In case of no
or little response (anti-HBs <100 IU/L) to vaccination, lamivudine (LAM) monotherapy can be
initiated. In patients who have protective anti-HBs titers of >100 IU/L, antiviral therapy is not
necessary but long-term monitoring of HBV serology including anti-HBs titers is required. Neg.,
negative; pos., positive.
The same group conducted a study comparing patients who were switched from
HBIG/LAM to LAM/ADV versus those who maintained on HBIG/LAM therapy
(Table 5) (see http://hepatologytextbook.com/link.php?id=9) (Angus 2007). One
patient in the switch group became HBsAg-positive, but remained HBV DNA-negative after 5 months; all others remained HBsAg- and HBV DNA-negative at a
median of 17.2 months from randomization.
In another study, sixteen patients with LAM resistance who had treatment at LT
with LAM plus ADV therapy were investigated (Lo 2005). Half of the patients were
administered HBIG for a median of 24 months. None of them had detectable HBV
DNA, 13 were HBsAg-negative, and 2 without combined HBIG therapy maintained
HBsAg-positive after a follow-up period of 7.7 and 9.5 months, respectively.
A small cohort of non-HBV replicating patients who were switched from
HBIG/LAM (150 mg/d) to ADV (5 mg/d)/LAM (150 mg/d) therapy after a mean
post-LT period of 6.5 months was retrospectively investigated (Neff 2007) (Table 5)
Update in Transplant Hepatology  365
(see http://hepatologytextbook.com/link.php?id=9). The mean length of follow-up
from therapy switch was 21 months. They found that none of the patients showed an
increase in transaminases while on dual nucleos(t)ide analog therapy. Although the
authors mentioned that HBV serologic testing was performed, no results were given
post-therapy switch.
In a recently published study from Hong Kong, HBIG-free monoprophylaxis with
ETV was evaluated. Only 26% of patients had undetectable HBV DNA at the time
of LT. HBsAg loss occurred in 91% within 2 years post-transplant but 13% had
reappearance of HBsAg and 22.5% were HBsAg-positive at the time of their last
follow-up visit (Fung 2011).
The efficacy of a switch after at least 12 months of HBIG/LAM to combination
therapy with an oral nucleoside and nucleotide analog was investigated (Saab 2011).
Estimated HBV reinfection rate was 1.7% at 1 year after HBIG withdrawal.
HBV prophylactic postransplant studies to date are limited, small and with short
follow-up periods (Table 5) (see http://hepatologytextbook.com/link.php?id=9).
Larger prospective studies are needed to show if nucleos(t)ide analogs can be safely
applied in the majority of HBV transplant patients against recurrent hepatitis B
infection. Presently, withdrawal of HBIG prophylaxis and maintenanance with
nuclesos(t)ide analog therapy can be considered in stable HBsAg-negative patients
in the long term post-LT.
There is no rationale for continuing HBIG therapy in case of viral breakthrough
with detectable HBV DNA. The choice of antiviral therapy in patients with HBV
recurrence depends on the current antiviral medication, the viral load, and the
resistance profile. Antiviral drug resistance can easily be established by genotypic
assays that identify specific mutations known to be associated with decreased
susceptibility to particular drugs.
Recurrence of hepatitis C in the allograft
The influence of HCV infection on allograft histology is highly variable. The liver
injury can vary from absent or mild disease despite high viral burden to cirrhosis in
the allograft (approximately 20-30% of recipients within 5-10 years of follow-up)
(Rubin 2011). Patient and graft survival in HCV-infected transplant recipients is
worse compared to those with other indications (Berenguer 2007, Forman 2002,
Testa 2000). After a diagnosis of cirrhosis, the decompensation risk appears to be
accelerated (17% and 42% at 6 and 12 months, respectively) (Berenguer 2000) and
patient survival is significantly decreased (66% and 30% at 1 and 5 years,
respectively) (Saab 2005). Female gender has been reported as a risk factor for
advanced recurrent HCV disease and graft loss after LT (Lai 2011). Several other
factors have been suggested that may accelerate HCV reinfection of the allograft
(Belli 2007, Berenguer 2003, Iacob 2007, Saab 2005) (Table 6).
There are insufficient and somewhat controversial data regarding the relationship
between immunosuppressive agents and clinical expression of HCV  recurrence
(Table 7) (Berenguer 2011). TAC and CSA do not seem to be significantly different
(Berenguer 2006a, Lake 2003, Martin 2004, Berenguer 2011) with respect to their
impact on the course of hepatitis C recurrence. Results from the multicenter ReViS-TC cohort study, conducted in 14 Spanish liver centres, revealed that CSA-based
immunosuppression regimens may be advantageous against viral relapse after
366  Hepatology 2012
antiviral therapy as compared to TAC-based immunosuppression (ReViS-TC Study
Group 2011).
Table 6. Factors that may accelerate histological progression in HCV patients after
liver transplantation.
Donor factors  Recipient factors
Age  Surgical factors (cold/warm ischemia time)
Liver graft steatosis  Age
Gender
Non-caucasian race
High viral load pre-transplant/early post-transplant
Genotype 1b
Muromonab-CD3 (OKT3®)
Bolus corticosteroids
Rapid tapering of corticosteroids
Various studies have demonstrated that slowly tapering corticosteroids over time
may prevent progression to severe forms of recurrent disease (Brillanti 2002,
McCaughan 2003).
Induction with MMF has been associated with more severe recurrence of HCV
(Berenguer 2003). Other investigators have found that MMF has no impact on
patient survival, rejection, or rate of viral recurrence in HCV-infected transplant
recipients based on biochemical changes and histological findings (Jain 2002). In a
recent systematic review, recurrent HCV was less severe in 5/9 studies with AZA
compared with 2/17 with MMF (Germani 2009).  Significantly  better patient
survival and graft survival was shown for HCV-infected patients treated with MMF,
TAC, and steroids than for patients treated only with TAC and steroids, with 4-year
patient survival rates of 79.5% vs. 73.8% and 4-year graft survival rates of 74.9%
vs. 69.5% (Wiesner 2005). MMF in combination with a CNI taper for 24 months
had a positive effect on fibrosis progression, graft inflammation, and alanine
aminotransferase levels (Bahra 2005). This may be due to the antifibrotic effects of
MMF through an antiproliferative effect on myofibroblast-like cells.
Interleukin-2 receptor inhibition can be safely used in HCV transplanted patients
(Togashi 2011, Klintmalm 2007, Calmus 2002) while OKT3 has shown to increase
severity of HCV recurrence resulting in impaired patient and allograft survival
(Rosen 1997).
Sufficient data from randomised controlled studies in HCV patients are lacking
with respect to the role of mTOR inhibitors in patients and graft outcome
(Samonakis 2005, Schacherer 2007, Asthana 2011). Results of one study suggest
that  de novo  SRL-based immunosuppression does not significantly affect the
severity of HCV recurrence (Asthana 2011). A lower fibrosis extent and rate of
progression was found among HCV transplant recipients with SRL as primary
immunosuppression as compared to controls with an SRL-free immunsosuppressive
regimen (McKenna 2011).
Update in Transplant Hepatology  367
Table 7. Factors that may accelerate histological progression in HCV patients after
liver transplantation.
Immunosuppressive agent  Severity of HCV recurrance
Calcineurin inhibitors  No difference between cyclosporin A and tacrolimus
Bolus corticosteroids  Higher risk of fibrosis progression, increase in viral load
Azathioprine    Controversial debate
Mycophenolate mofetil  Controversial debate
Monoclonal CD3-antibodies
(OKT3)
Increased risk of graft failure
Interleukin-2 receptor antibodies  No disadvantage on graft survival
mTOR inhibitors Controversial (reduction of vs. no impact on fibrosis
progression)
Regular histological evaluation of post-transplant chronic hepatitis C in 1-year (or
maximum 2-year) intervals is recommendable to determine the grade of
inflammation and stage of fibrosis. In particular, the biopsy result is important for
therapy decision, to exclude signs of rejection prior to antiviral therapy and to
determine the efficacy of antiviral therapy. In addition, there are some published as
well as ongoing studies evaluating the role of non-invasive measurement of fibrosis
in HCV and non-HCV transplant recipients (Cross 2011, Beckebaum 2010).
IFN α and RBV therapy may prevent the development of HCV graft cirrhosis
(Hashemi 2011, Gordon 2009, Cicinnati 2007b). This treatment is however
associated with more side effects and is far less effective than in the non-transplant
setting. The most applicable treatment strategy is treatment of established HCV
recurrence with PEG-IFN α and ribavirin, which results in an SVR of 20-30%
(Gordon 2009). Preemptive antiviral therapy (Shergill 2005, Sugawara 2004,
Chalasani 2005, Bzowej 2011) has not shown superior effects as compared to
established HCV therapy (Berenguer 2008, Chalasani 2005, Bizollon 2005, Castells
2005, Toniutto 2005) and should only be considered in cases of rapid progression of
HCV infection in the early post-transplant period. Most published studies in the
transplant setting are not controlled, monocentric and/or comprise a small patient
cohort (Shergill 2005, Sugawara 2004, Gane 1998, Kizilisik 1997, Ghalib 2000).
Recently published results indicate that RBV pre-treatment increased the
tolerability of the antiviral treatment, and improved its efficacy in LT patients
(Merli 2011).
The NS3/4 protease inhibitors telaprevir and boceprevir are metabolized primarily
by the cytochrome P450  CYP3A4. Coadministration with CNI metabolised
primarily by CYP3A4 has shown to result in increased dose-normalized CSA and
TAC exposure by ~4.6-fold and ~70-fold (Garg 2011).
Optimal onset, dose and duration of therapy are not known yet. Positive predictive
factors for SVR include use of erythropoietin, patient compliance, treatment with
PEG-IFN (versus standard IFN) and an early histological response (Berenguer
2006b).
The proportion of patients who need a dose reduction of their antiviral therapy
due to anemia or leucopenia may be reduced by the use of erythropoietin or
granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (not approved for this
indication). Reported risk of rejection is low if antiviral therapy is closely monitored
368  Hepatology 2012
(Gane 1998, Kizilisik 1997). Therapy needs to be withdrawn in case of significant
histologically-proven rejection.
Recurrence of cholestatic liver diseases and autoimmune
hepatitis
Data about the frequency of recurrent cholestatic and AIH-related liver disease vary
in the literature depending on the follow-up period and criteria chosen for definition
of disease recurrence.
The post-transplant prognosis for PBC patients is excellent, with an
approximately 80% 5-year survival reported by most large centres (Carbone 2011,
Silveira 2010). It has been reported that HLA-A, -B, and -DR mismatches between
the donor and the recipient decrease the risk of disease recurrence in PBC patients
(Morioka 2007a, Hashimoto 2001). A recently published study reported recurrent
PBC in one-third of patients at 11-13 years post-transplant (Charatcharoenwitthaya
2007). Various other studies reporting recurrent PBC are depicted in Table 8 (Jakob
2006, Liermann-Garcia 2001, Montano-Loza 2010, Hytiroglou 2008).
Table 8. Recurrence rates in patients transplanted for autoimmune-related or
cholestatic liver disease.
Reference  Patients, n  Follow-up after liver
transplantation
Recurrence
rate
AIH  Duclos-Vallée 2003   17  >120 months  41%
AIH  Prados 1998   27  mean 44 months  33%
AIH  Molmenti 2002  55  median 29 months  20%
AIH  Campsen 2008  66  median 81 months  36%
AIH  Vogel 2004   28  mean 100 months  32%
PBC  Charatcharoenwitthaya 2007  154  mean 130 months  34%
PBC  Jakob 2006  100  up to 17 years  16%
PBC  Liermann-Garcia 2001   400  mean 56 months  17%
PBC  Montano-Loza 2010  108  mean 88 months  26%
PBC  Hytiroglou 2008   100  mean 44 months  16%
PSC  Cholongitas 2008   69  median 110 months  13%
PSC  Alabraba 2009   230  median 55 months   24%
PSC  Vera 2002   152  median 36 months  37%
PSC  Graziadei 1999   150  mean 54 months  20%
PSC  Goss 1997   127  mean 36 months  9%
Diagnosis of PBC in the transplanted liver is usually more challenging than
diagnosis in the native liver. Immunoglobulin M and anti-mitochondrial antibodies
(AMA) often persist, and elevated cholestatic enzymes may be due to other causes
of bile duct damage such as ischemic cholangiopathy or chronic ductopenic
rejection. Recurrent PBC is a histological diagnosis, typically appearing as
granulomatous cholangitis or duct lesions. The frequency of recurrence will be
considerably underestimated if a liver biopsy is carried out only when clinical
features are apparent.
Some investigators have found that CSA-based immunosuppressive therapy is
associated with lower PBC recurrence rates as compared to TAC-based
Update in Transplant Hepatology  369
immunosuppression (Wong 1993,  Montano-Loza 2010). However, long-term
survival has been shown to be not significantly different between CSA-and TAC-treated patients (Silveira 2010). The impact of UDCA on the natural history of
recurrent disease remains unknown. In the Mayo Clinic transplant cohort, 50% of
recurrent PBC patients receiving UDCA showed normalization of serum alkaline
phosphatase and alanine aminotransferase levels over a 36-month period compared
with 22% of untreated patients (Charatcharoenwitthaya 2007). Although no
significant differences in the rate of histological progression could be detected
between the treated and untreated subgroups, the proportion of individuals with
histological progression was significantly lower in those that showed improvement
of biochemical parameters regardless of treatment.
The reported recurrence rate for PSC after LT ranges between 9% and 37%
(Cholongitas 2008, Alabraba 2009, Vera 2002, Graziadei 1999, Goss 1997). A
British liver transplant group found significantly better recurrence-free survival
rates in patients who underwent colectomy before or during LT and in those with
with non-extended donor criteria allografts (Alabraba 2009).
Recurrent PSC is diagnosed by histology and/or imaging of the biliary tree and
exclusion of other causes of nonanastomotic biliary strictures. Histopathological
findings in PSC include fibrous cholangitis, fibro-obliterative lesions, ductopenia,
and biliary fibrosis. In a study conducted by the Mayo clinic, recurrence of PSC was
defined by strict cholangiographic and histological criteria in patients with PSC, in
whom other causes of bile duct strictures were absent (Graziadei 2002). However,
due to the lack of a histological gold standard, the diagnosis of PSC recurrence is
based primarily on cholangiographic features. Due to its responsiveness to steroid
therapy, IgG4-associated cholangitis instead of suspected or recurrent PSC should
be considered in patients with atypical features including history of pancreatitis.
Interestingly, despite immunosuppression, a significantly higher corticosteroid
requirement was reported in the transplant as compared to the nontransplant setting,
with 20% of PSC patients becoming corticosteroid dependent after LT (Ho 2005). A
recent study reported that maintenance steroids (>3 months) for ulcerative colitis
post-LT were a risk factor for recurrent PSC (Cholongitas 2008).
AIH recurrence has been reported in about one-third of patients within a post-transplant follow-up period of ≥5 years (Mendes 2011, Tripathi 2009, Duclos-Vallee 2003, Campsen 2008, Vogel 2004). Incidence increases over time as
immunosuppression is reduced (Prados 1998). A long-term follow-up study (>10
years) by a French group found AIH recurrence in 41% of the patients. The authors
recommended regular liver biopsies, because histological signs precede abnormal
biochemical liver values in about one-fourth of patients (Duclos-Vallee 2003). The
diagnosis of recurrent AIH may include histological features, the presence of
autoantibodies, and increased gamma globulins. The majority of published studies
did not confirm a post-transplant prognostic role of antibodies in  patients
undergoing LT for AIH. Conflicting data exist regarding the presence of specific
HLA antigens that predispose patients to AIH recurrence after LT (Gonzalez-Koch
2001, Molmenti 2002). Histological signs of recurrence include interface hepatitis,
lymphoplasmacytic infiltration, and/or lobular involvement. In an analysis of data
from 28 patients with AIH, 5-year survival rate was not significantly different from
controls with genetic liver diseases (Vogel 2004). Patients had more episodes of
acute rejection though, in comparison to the control group.
370  Hepatology 2012
Patients with AIH typically receive low-dose steroid therapy after LT. The
transplant centre in Colorado that found that recurrence was not strongly influenced
by steroid withdrawal in their cohort attempts to minimise or stop steroid therapy in
AIH transplant patients (Campsen 2008).
Outcome in patients transplanted for hepatic malignancies
The results of early studies of LT for HCC were disappointing. More than 60% of
patients developed tumor recurrence within the first two transplant years (Ringe
1989). Currently, there are recurrence rates of 10-15% in patients fulfilling the
Milan criteria (Zavaglia 2005). In an analysis of predictors of survival and tumor-free survival in a cohort of 155 HCC LT recipients, histological grade of
differentiation and macroscopic vascular invasion were identified as independent
predictors of survival and tumor recurrence (Zavaglia 2005). Others identified
MELD score >22, AFP >400 ng/mL and age >60 years as negative predictors for
survival in HCC (Sotiropoulos 2008b, Jelic 2010). For patients having an indication
for LT despite exceeding the Milan criteria, the use of marginal grafts or
performance of LDLT has been considered as a reasonable option.
Expansion beyond the Milan criteria to University of California San Francisco
(UCSF) criteria (single tumour <6.5 cm; two to three tumours, none >4.5 cm or total
diameter <8 cm, no vascular invasion) or even more liberal criteria (no portal
invasion, no extrahepatic disease) have been discussed widely (Sotiropoulos 2007,
Silva 2011, Jelic 2010). Centers such as the San Francisco Transplant Group as well
as the UCLA Transplant Group have demonstrated 5-year survival rates of 50-80%
after LT for tumours beyond the Milan criteria but within UCSF criteria (Duffy
2007, Yao 2007).
Recently, the 'up to seven' criteria (with 7 being the sum of the size and number of
tumors for any given HCC) were suggested as an approach to include additional
HCC patients as transplant candidates. However, acceptance of a more liberal organ
allocation policy would result in a further increase of HCC patients on the waiting
list and in denying the use of these organs to other non-HCC patients.
Expansion of criteria in the LDLT setting is even more challenging due to the
donor risk and the risk of selection of tumours with unfavorable biology following
the concept of fast-tracking (Hiatt 2005). Novel molecular biology techniques, such
as genotyping for HCC, may become relevant for determining recurrence-free
survival and improving patient selection but these biomarkers can not yet been used
for clinical decision making.
Recently, a satisfactory outcome and potential survival benefit were reported in
studies and a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials  with SRL-based
immunosuppression in patients transplanted for HCC (Kneteman 2004, Zimmerman
2008, Toso 2007, Liang 2011). These results are in line with a retrospective analysis
based on the Scientific Registry of US Transplant Recipients, which included 2491
HCC LT recipients and 12,167 recipients with non-HCC diagnoses. Moreover, the
SILVER Study, a large prospective randomized controlled trial, comparing SRL-containing versus SRL-free immunosuppression will provide further results and
details with respect to the impact of SRL on HCC tumour recurrence (Schnitzbauer
2010b).
Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and subsequent LT has shown promising results for
patients with localized, unresectable hilar cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC) (Rea
Update in Transplant Hepatology  371
2005, Masuoka 2011). In a recently published US study, outcome of 38 patients
who underwent LT was compared to that of 19 patients who underwent combined
radical bile duct resection with partial hepatectomy (Hong 2011). Tumor was
located in intrahepatic bile duct in 37 patients and in hilar bile duct in 20 patients.
Results demonstrated that LT combined with neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies is
superior to partial hepatectomy with adjuvant therapy. Challenges of LT attributable
to neoadjuvant therapy include tissue injury from radiation therapy and vascular
complications that include hepatic artery thrombosis. Predictors of response to the
neoadjuvant protocol prior to LT need to be determined (Heimbach 2008).
Increasing age, high pretransplant tumor marker, residual tumour size in the explant
>2 cm, tumour grade, previous cholecystectomy and perineural invasion were
identified as predictors of recurrence following LT (Knight 2007).
Metastatic lesions originating from neuroendocrine tumours (NET) may be
hormone-producing (peptide hormones or amines) or may present as nonfunctional
tumours (Frilling 2006, Lehnert 1998). They are characterized by slow growth and
frequent metastasis to the liver, and their spread may be limited to the liver for
protracted periods of time. Most studies in patients transplanted for NET are limited
and usually restricted to small numbers of patients. A recently published analysis
based on the UNOS database including patients transplanted for NET between
October 1988 and January 2008, showed that long-term survival of NET patients
was similar to that of patients with HCC. Excellent results can be obtained in highly
selected patients and a waiting time for LT longer than 2 months (Gedaly 2011).
Long-term results from prospective studies are needed to further define selection
criteria for patients with NET for LT, to identify predictors for disease recurrence,
and to determine the influence of the primary tumour site on patient post-transplant
survival.
Recurrent alcohol abuse after liver transplantation for
alcoholic liver disease
Alcoholic liver disease has become a leading indication of LT in Europe and the
United States. Patient and graft survival is excellent in those maintaining alcohol
abstinence after LT. Severe chronic alcohol consumption after LT significantly
decreases the medium- and long-term survival (Pfitzmann 2007). A recent study has
shown that urine ethyl glucuronide is a reliable marker for detection of alcohol
relapse after LT (Staufer 2011). Studies evaluating recurrent alcohol use have
reported a mean incidence of relapse in one-third of patients ranging from 10% to
50% in up to 5 years of follow-up (Burra 2005).
According to results from the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR),
mortality and graft failure were more often related to de  novo  tumors,
cardiovascular and social factors in alcoholic LT patients as compared to patients
transplanted for other etiologies (Burra 2010). The role of the length of pre-transplant abstinence as a predictor of post-transplant abstinence has been widely
discussed. Many studies have assessed possible risk factors for alcoholic relapse
after LT. The following factors have been identified as risks for recurrent alcohol
abuse: a shorter length of abstinence before LT, more than one pretransplant alcohol
withdrawal, alcohol abuse in first relatives, younger age, and alcohol dependence
(Perney 2005). Accordingly, the results from the Pittsburgh Transplant Center
revealed that the prognosis regarding continued abstinence post-transplant is much
372  Hepatology 2012
more favourable for individuals with a diagnosis of overconsumption (abuse) than
for those who meet criteria for alcohol dependence (DiMartini 2008).
A recently published study reported that poorer social support, family alcohol
history, and pretransplant abstinence of ≤6 months showed significant associations
with relapse (Dew 2008). In addition, an Australian study identified the presence of
psychiatric comorbidities, or a score higher than 3 on the High-Risk Alcoholism
Relapse (HRAR) scale as factors predictive of relapse into harmful drinking (Haber
2007).
Experiences with liver transplantation in inherited
metabolic liver diseases in adult patients
LT is regarded as an effective treatment strategy for patients with Wilson’s Disease
which presents as deterioration of cirrhosis not responsive to treatment, as acute on
chronic disease or fulminant hepatic failure (Moini 2010). LT reverses the
abnormalities of copper metabolism by converting the copper kinetics from a
homozygous to a heterozygous phenotype, thus providing an adequate increase of
ceruloplasmin levels and a decrease of urinary copper excretion post-transplant. The
King's College Hospital reported excellent long-term results after LT in patients
who have undergone LT for Wilson’s Disease since 1994 with 5-year patient and
graft survival rates of 87.5% (Sutcliffe 2003). There are several reports in the
literature indicating a reversal of neurological symptoms after LT (Martin 2008).
However, the course of neurological symptoms remains unpredictable and it is still
a matter of debate if LT should be considered in patients with severe neurological
impairment (Pabón 2008).
Αlpha-1-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency is a common genetic reason for pediatric
LT, but a rare indication in adults. The Z allele is most commonly responsible for
severe deficiency and disease. LT corrects the liver disease and provides complete
replacement of serum AAT activity.  567 AAT recipients who underwent LT
between 1995 and 2004 were retrospectively investigated (Kemmer 2008). Results
based on UNOS data revealed 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival rates of 89%, 85%,
and 83%, respectively.
In hemochromatosis, iron depletion therapy prior to LT may be associated with a
better outcome after LT and is therefore strongly recommended (Weiss 2007). It has
been reported that the survival of patients who undergo LT for hereditary
hemochromatosis is markedly lower in comparison to other indications (Dar 2009,
Brandhagen 2001). Reduced post-transplant survival in patients with
hemochromatosis has been attributed to cardiac problems and increased infectious
complications. Findings derived from the UNOS database revealed 1-year and 5-year survival rates of 75% and 64% in patients with iron overload, as compared to
83% and 70% in those without iron overload (Brandhagen 2001). More recent
results from patients with hemochromatosis (n=217) transplanted between 1997-2006 revealed excellent 1-year (86.1%), 3-year (80.8%), and 5-year (77.3%) patient
survival rates, which were not different from those transplanted for other liver
diseases (Yu 2007).
Update in Transplant Hepatology  373
Outcome after liver transplantation for acute
hepatic failure
Acute hepatic failure (AHF) accounts for 5-12% of LT activity worldwide. Drug-induced liver injury due to acetaminophen overdose is the most common cause of
LT for acute liver failure in developed countries (Craig 2010, Au 2011). Other
etiologies comprise idiosyncratic drugs (such as isoniazid/rifampicin, cumarins,
acetaminophen, ectasy, tricyclic antidepressants), Budd-Chiari syndrome, Wilson’s
Disease, hepatitis A, B and E infection or autoimmune disease.
Patients with acute fulminant liver disease should be transferred to an ICU at a
medical centre experienced in managing AHF, with LT capabilities. Bioartificial
hepatic devices may serve as bridging therapy to native liver recovery or to LT.
Early postoperative complications in patients transplanted for AHF include sepsis,
multisystem organ failure, and primary graft failure. Serum creatinine
concentrations above 200 µmol/L pretransplant, non-white race of the recipient,
donor body mass index >35 kg/m
2
and recipient age >50 years have been suggested
as risk factors for post-transplant mortality (Wigg 2005). Others reported that
extended donor criteria rates and severe cerebral edema were associated with worse
outcome (Chan 2009). The Edinburgh LT centre investigated the impact of
perioperative renal dysfunction on post-transplant renal outcomes in AHF patients.
They found that older age, female gender, hypertension, CSA and non-acetaminophen-induced AHF but not the severity of perioperative renal injury were
predictive for the development of chronic kidney injury (Leithead 2011).
The results in patients transplanted for AHF have improved within the last decade
due to the establishment of prognostic models, improved intensive care management
and the option for LDLT which has a limited role in the US and Europe but plays a
major role in Asia (Lo 2008). AHF was the indication for LDLT in more than 10%
of the cohort reported by two Asian groups (Morioka 2007b, Lo 2004).
Available data document that survival in patients with AHF is inferior to that of
recipients with nonacute indications for LT within the first year but comparable in
the long-term (Chan 2009, Wigg 2005).
Conclusion
LT is challenging due to a shortage of organs and a prolonged waiting-list time. The
large disparity between the number of available cadaver donor organs and recipients
awaiting LT has created an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate selection
criteria. The rationale of allocation systems utilizing the MELD score is to prioritize
patients with severe liver dysfunction ("the sickest first"). This results in decreased
waiting list mortality from 20 to 10% in the Eurotransplant region but also in a
reduction of 1-year post-transplant survival by approximately 10%. A potential
modification of the MELD allocation system or rather development of an improved
prognostic scoring system incorporating donor-related factors, pretransplant
mortality and post-transplant outcome is urgently warranted to optimize organ
allocation in the future.
Due to the availability of antiviral drugs, the survival of patients undergoing LT
for HBV infection has dramatically improved and has become comparable to or
even better than the survival of patients with non-virus-related liver diseases. HBIG-
374  Hepatology 2012
free therapeutic regimens with new promising nucleos(t)ide analog combinations
are currently being investigated for their efficacy and safety as first-line therapy in
clinical studies.
HCV has become a leading indication for LT in Europe and the United States.
There is ongoing research aiming to define host or viral factors that predict
recurrence, the impact of immunosuppressive regimens, and the appropriate
timepoint and dosing for combined PEG-IFN and RBV therapy. The overall risk
and benefit of new antiviral treatment strategies including protease inhibitors remain
to be evaluated.
Data about the frequency of disease recurrence in cholestatic and autoimmune
liver diseases vary in the literature. Diagnosis of disease relapse in cholestatic and
autoimmune liver disease is more challenging than in the non-transplant setting.
Most studies report excellent medium-term and long-term results despite limited
therapeutic options for disease recurrence.
LT in HCC patients provides excellent outcomes and low recurrence rates
following the Milan criteria. Expansion of transplantation criteria beyond the Milan
criteria has been discussed at length. The acceptance of a more liberal organ
allocation policy may result in a further increase of the proportion of patients
transplanted for HCC and denying the use of these organs to other patients for
whom better results may be achieved.  Recent developments in genomic and
proteomic approaches may allow the identification of new biomarkers for prediction
of HCC recurrence.
Non-use of alcohol of ≥6 months pretransplant is widely considered the
prerequisite time for listing for LT. There are few reliable predictors of relapse in
alcoholic patients after LT. Survival rates in patients with alcohol-related liver
disease are similar or even better when compared to the outcomes of patients who
undergo transplant for other types of chronic liver disease. In contrast, survival is
worse in patients with heavy alcohol consumption after LT.
The management of cardiovascular, renal, coagulopathic, cerebral and infectious
complications in patients with AHF is clinically challenging. Prognostic models are
helpful but not entirely accurate in predicting those who will require LT. Due to
advances in intensive care medicine and surgical techniques, outcomes for patients
with AHF have progressively improved during the last 2 decades.
Much attention has been directed to reducing CNI-associated long-term
complications. Cardiovascular comorbidities due to metabolic complications such as
diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, obesity, and arterial hypertension account for 30-70% of long-term morbidity. Current trends of immunosuppressive strategies
include CNI-sparing/-free protocols including MMF-  and/or mTOR-based
immunosuppressive regimens and corticosteroid-avoidance protocols. CNI delay
with induction therapy for bridging the early postoperative phase should be
considered especially in patients with high MELD scores. Finally, "individually
tailored immunosuppressive" protocols may optimize drug efficacy, minimise drug
toxicity and improve transplant outcome.
Update in Transplant Hepatology  375
References
Afonso RC, Hidalgo R, Zurstrassen MP, et al. Impact of renal failure on liver transplantation
survival. Transplant Proc 2008;40:808-10.
Alabraba E, Nightingale P, Gunson B, et al. A re-evaluation of the risk factors for the recurrence
of primary sclerosing cholangitis in liver allografts. Liver Transpl 2009;15:330-40.
Andrews PA, Emery VC, Newstead C. Summary of the British Transplantation Society
Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of CMV Disease After Solid Organ
Transplantation. Transplantation 2011; [Epub ahead of print]
Angus PW, Strasser SI, Patterson S, et al. A randomized study to assess the safety and
efficacy of adefovir dipivoxil substitution for hepatitis B immune globulin in liver
transplantation patients receiving long-term low dose IM HBIG and lamivudine
prophylaxis. Hepatology 2007;46:238A.
Asthana S, Toso C, Meeberg G, et al. The impact of sirolimus on hepatitis C recurrence after
liver transplantation. Can J Gastroenterol 2011;25:28-34.
Au JS, Navarro VJ, Rossi S. Drug-induced liver injury - its pathophysiology and evolving
diagnostic tools. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011;34:11-20.
Bahra M, Neumann UI, Jacob D, et al. MMF and calcineurin taper in recurrent hepatitis C after
liver transplantation: impact on histological course. Am J Transplant 2005;5:406-11.
Bajjoka I, Hsaiky L, Brown K, Abouljoud M. Preserving renal function in liver transplant
recipients with rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin and delayed initiation of calcineurin
inhibitors. Liver Transpl 2008;14:66-72.
Beavers KL, Sandler RS, Shrestha R. Donor morbidity associated with right lobectomy for living
donor liver transplantation to adult recipients. Liver Transpl 2002;8:110-7.
Beckebaum S (a), Cicinnati V, Brokalaki E, Frilling A, Gerken G, Broelsch CE. CNI-sparing
regimens within the liver transplant setting: experiences of a single center. Clin
Transpl 2004;215-20.
Beckebaum S (b), Cicinnati VR, Broelsch CE. Future directions in immunosuppression.
Transplant Proc 2004; 36:574S-6S.
Beckebaum S, Cicinnati V, Gerken G. Current concepts for prophylaxis and treatment of
hepatitis B reinfection after liver transplantation. Med Klin (Munich) 2008; 103:190-7.
Beckebaum S, Sotiropoulos G, Gerken G, Cicinnati V. Hepatitis B and liver transplantation:
2008 update. Rev Med Virol 2009;19:7-29.
Beckebaum S, Iacob S, Klein CG, et al. Assessment of allograft fibrosis by transient
elastography and noninvasive biomarker scoring systems in liver transplant patients.
Transplantation 2010;89:983-93.
Beckebaum S, Cicinnati VR. Conversion to combined mycophenolate mofetil and low-dose
calcineurin inhibitor therapy for renal dysfunction in liver transplant patients: never too
late? Dig Dis Sci 2011;56:4-6.
Becker T, Foltys D, Bilbao I, et al. Patient outcomes in two steroid-free regimens using
tacrolimus monotherapy after daclizumab induction and tacrolimus with
mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplantation. Transplantation 2008;86:1689-94.
Belli LS, Burroughs AK, Burra P, et al. Liver Transplantation for HCV cirrhosis: improved
survival in recent years and increased severity of recurrent disease in female
recipients: results of a long term retrospective study. Liver Transpl 2007;13:737-40.
Bellomo R, Ronco C, Kellum JA, Mehta RL, Palevsky P. Acute renal failure - definition,
outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs:
the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality
Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit Care 2004;8 R204-2.
Benlloch S, Berenguer M, Prieto M, et al. De novo internal neoplasms after liver transplantation:
increased risk and aggressive behavior in recent years? Am J Transplant
2004;4:596-604.
Berenguer M, Prieto M, Rayon JM, et al. Natural history of clinically compensated HCV-related
graft cirrhosis after liver transplantation. Hepatology 2000;32:852-8.
Berenguer M, Crippin J, Gish R, et al. A model to predict severe HCV-related disease following
liver transplantation. Hepatology 2003;38:34-41.
Berenguer M (a), Aguilera V, Prieto M, et al. Effect of calcineurin inhibitors on survival and
histologic disease severity in HCV-infected liver transplant recipients. Liver Transpl
2006;12:762-7.

Book on hepatitis from page 356 to 363

Book on hepatitis from page 356 to 363

356  Hepatology 2012
parameter) without a downward trend, rising lactate, and hypoglycemic episodes.
PNFG is a critical situation and requires immediate retransplantation.
Death within the first year after LT is often associated with bacterial infections.
Management of infections due to multidrug-resistant gram-positive pathogens
represent a major therapeutic challenge in the transplant setting (Radunz 2011).
Overall incidence of fungal infections in LT recipients has declined due to early
identification and treatment of high-risk patients. However, overall mortality rate
for invasive candidiasis and aspergillosis remains high (Liu 2011).
The clinical symptoms of acute cellular rejection are non-specific, may not be
apparent or may manifest as fever, right upper quadrant pain, and malaise. A liver
biopsy is indispensable for confirming the diagnosis of acute rejection. High dose
corticosteroids (3 days of 500-1000 mg methylprednisolone) are the first-line
treatment for acute rejection.
Long-term complications after liver
transplantation
Management issues for the long term include opportunistic infections, chronic
ductopenic rejection, side effects due to immunosuppression including
cardiovascular complications and renal dysfunction, de novo malignancies, biliary
complications, osteoporosis and disease recurrence.
Opportunistic infections
Opportunistic infections in the medium and long term after LT are primarily viral
and fungal in origin. Opportunistic bacterial infections are uncommon after 6
months in patients receiving stable and reduced maintenance doses of
immunosuppression with good graft function.
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection plays an important role in the LT setting
(Andrews 2011) (Figure 3). Current guidelines recommend antiviral prophylaxis
over pre-emptive therapy in preventing CMV disease in high-risk LT recipients
(CMV-seronegative recipients of organs from CMV-seropositive donors [D+/R-]).
Delayed-onset CMV disease occurs in 15-38% of CMV D+/R- LT patients with
prophylactic treatment over 3 months (Eid 2010). A controlled clinical trial
demonstrated that valganciclovir, an oral prodrug of ganciclovir, is as effective and
safe as intravenouos (IV) ganciclovir for the prophylaxis of CMV disease in solid
organ (including liver) transplant recipients (Paya 2004). In the kidney transplant
setting, the Impact study demonstrated a marked reduction in the incidence of CMV
disease extending valganciclovir prophylaxis from 100 to 200 days (Humar 2010).
However, side effects and financial burden of this prolonged approach need to be
considered. In cases of ganciclovir-resistant CMV disease, alternative therapeutic
options include CMV hyperimmune globulins, or in rare cases, antiviral medication
(foscarnet, cidofovir or leflunomide) (Eid 2010).
Occurrence of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in the first
year after solid-organ transplantation is typically related to Epstein-Barr virus
(EBV) infection. EBV-seronegativity of the recipient before infection, high EB viral
load, intensity of immunosuppression and young age have been reported as risk
factors for PTLD (Smets 2002). Outcomes have improved since rituximab has been
incorporated into treatment regimens (Kamdar 2011). Therapeutic management
Update in Transplant Hepatology  357
options include reduction of immunosuppression, rituximab, combination
chemotherapy, and adoptive immunotherapy.
Oral reactivation of human herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1) after LT is common.
Development of varicella-zoster virus (HHV-3) after LT is typically related to
intense immunosuppressive therapy and its therapy does not differ from the non-transplant setting. There is a potential role of human herpes virus (HHV)-6 and
HHV-7 as copathogens in the direct and indirect illnesses caused by CMV. To what
extent HHV-6 and HHV-7 may be directly causing symptomatic disease is not clear
(Razonable 2009).
Figure 3. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection of the upper gastrointestinal tract. A. Liver-transplanted patient complaining of dysphagia and epigastric discomfort with multiple
longitudinal esophageal ulcers seen at upper endoscopy. B. Endoscopic findings of deep
esophageal ulcerations with fibrinoid necrosis in another immunocompromised patient. In both
cases, lesions were caused by CMV infection. Diagnosis depends on a positive mucosal
biopsy, which should include specimens from the ulcer margins and ulcer base. Hematoxylin
and eosin staining typically reveals "owl's-eye" cytoplasmic and intranuclear inclusion bodies.
Chronic ductopenic rejection
Advances in immunosuppressive regimens have greatly reduced the incidence of
chronic ductopenic rejection and allograft failure. Chronic rejection begins within
weeks to months or years after LT and affects about 4% to 8% of patients
(Neuberger 1999). The most widely recognized manifestation of chronic rejection is
obliterative arteriopathy and damage or loss of small ducts (Demetris 1997).
Chronic rejection may appear indolently and might only become apparent as liver
test injury abnomalities (GGT, AP, bilirubin, transaminases). The diagnosis needs to
be confirmed by histopathologic examination. Switching the baseline
immunosuppression from cyclosporine A (CSA) to tacrolimus (TAC) and initiating
mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) rescue therapy represents a treatment option in these
patients (Daly 2002).
358  Hepatology 2012
CNI-induced nephrotoxicity and alternative
immunosuppressive protocols
Despite the introduction of new immunosuppressive agents (Table 4), calcineurin
inhibitors (CNI) remain the key drugs of most immunosuppressive regimens. Both
CSA and TAC inhibit the calcineurin-calmodulin complex and therefore IL-2
production. Renal failure, mainly due to CNI nephrotoxicity, is the most common
complication following orthotopic LT. The incidence of chronic renal dysfunction
has been reported in up to 70% of patients in the long term after LT (Afonso 2008,
Ziolkowski 2003). End stage renal disease has been described to occur in 18% of
patients during a post-transplant follow-up of 13 years (Gonwa 2001).
In LT patients with CNI-induced nephrotoxicity, a complete replacement of CNI
with conversion to MMF has shown conflicting results with respect to occurence of
rejection ranging between 0% and 60% (Creput 2007, Moreno 2003, Schmeding
2011, Moreno 2004). MMF inhibits inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase, a
critical enzyme in the de novo pathway of purine synthesis. Results from previous
studies with immunosuppressive regimens including MMF and minimal CNI
treatment suggest a significant improvement in renal function in this patient group
(Beckebaum 2011, Cicinnati 2007a, Beckebaum 2004a, Cantarovich 2003, Garcia
2003, Raimondo 2003).
De novo immunosuppression with MMF combined with induction therapy and
delayed CNI introduction is another approach to reduce CNI-related nephrotoxicity
especially in patients with higher MELD score or significant renal dysfunction. In a
randomized clinical trial, a daclizumab/MMF/delayed low-dose TAC-based
regimen was compared with a standard TAC/MMF regimen (Yoshida 2005). In
both study arms, corticosteroids were tapered over time. Statistically significant
higher median GFR were found in the delayed CNI group, although acute rejection
episodes were not statistically significant different in either group. Similar results
have been found in two retrospective studies in LT patients receiving thymoglobulin
induction therapy and delayed initiation of CNI (Bajjoka 2008, Soliman 2007). The
group from Regensburg initiated a single arm pilot study to determine the safety and
efficacy of a CNI-free combination therapy (basiliximab induction/MPA and
delayed [10 days post-transplant] sirolimus [SRL]) in patients with impaired renal
function (GFR <50 ml/min and/or serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dL) at LT
(Schnitzbauer 2010a). The study design stipulates that if at least 8 of the 9 patients
do not present with steroid-resistant acute rejection within 30 days after LT, an
additional 20 patients will be included. Results from this “bottom-up”
immunosuppressive strategy need to be awaited to determine if this strategy works
to prevent or avoid further renal dysfunction during follow-up after LT. Moreover, a
flaw of combined MMF and mTOR inhibitors therapy are agonistic side effects
such as bone marrow suppression, which may limit their combined use in a
substantial proportion of patients.
Another approach to maintain renal preservation is replacement of CNI by mTOR
inhibitors such as SRL or everolimus (EVL) (Sanchez 2005, Harper 2011, Saliba
2011, Kawahara 2011). Reported side effects of mTOR inhibitors include increased
incidence of wound infection and dehiscence, hepatic artery thrombosis,
hyperlipidemia, thrombocytopenia, leucopenia, and anemia. The antifibrotic effect
of mTOR inhibitors may provide an explanation for impaired wound healing
(Watson 1999).
Update in Transplant Hepatology  359
In a recently published randomized controlled study, patients were treated with
CSA for the first 10 days, then randomized to receive EVL plus CSA up to day 30,
and then either continued on EVL monotherapy (EVL group) or maintained on CSA
with or without MMF (control group) (Masetti 2010). One-year results showed that
MDRD was significantly better in the EVL monotherapy group as compared to the
control group. Results from two multicenter, randomized, Phase III studies
(ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00378014 & NCT00622869) comparing EVL-based regimen versus CNI-based regimen in de novo LT recipients will add further
information with respect to the role of mTOR inhibitors for renal preservation after
LT.
Table 4. Clinically used immunosuppressive agents in liver transplantation.
Immunosuppressant Class  Immunosuppressive Agent
Corticosteroids  Prednisone, prednisolone, methylprednisolone
Calcineurin inhibitors  Cyclosporin A, tacrolimus
Antimetabolites  Mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine
mTOR Inhibitors  Sirolimus, everolimus
Polyclonal antibodies  Antithymocyte globulin (ATG)
Monoclonal anti-CD3 antibodies  Muromonab-CD3 (OKT3)
Chimeric monoclonal antibodies  Anti-IL-2 inhibitors (basiliximab)
Monoclonal anti-CD52 antibodies  Alemtuzumab (campath-1H)
Other side effects of CNI
Beside potential nephrotoxicity, CNI therapy is associated with side effects that
include cardiovascular complications, tremor, headache, electrolyte abnormalities,
hyperuricemia, hepatotoxicity, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Neurotoxicity,
including tremor, paresthesia, muscle weakness, and seizures, more often occurs in
TAC-treated patients; whereas gingival hyperplasia, as a rare event, and hirsutism
are associated with CSA treatment.
Cardiovascular side effects due to CNI and steroids include hyperlipidemia,
arterial hypertension, and diabetes (Beckebaum 2004b).
The prevalence of new-onset diabetes mellitus after LT has been reported to occur
in 9-21% of patients (John 2002, Konrad 2000). The prevalence of post-transplant
diabetes is even higher if cofactors such as hepatitis C are present. In various
studies, the diabetogenic potential has been reported to be higher in patients
receiving TAC than in those receiving CSA. In contrast, CSA has a more
pronounced effect on lipid levels. CSA can act by modulating the activity of the
LDL receptor or by inhibiting the bile acid 26-hydroxylase that induces bile acid
synthesis from cholesterol.
Corticosteroid minimization/avoidance protocols
There is ongoing discussion of steroid avoidance due to dyslipidemia, osteoporosis,
development of cataracts, weight gain, hypertension, and a deleterious impact on
glucose control. A recently published literature review (Lerut 2009) analysed the
actual status of corticosteroid minimization protocols in LT based on a detailed
analysis of 51 peer- and 6 non-peer-reviewed studies. Results from the majority of
360  Hepatology 2012
studies showed that these protocols have clearly metabolic benefits and are safe
with respect to graft and patient survival. Other research groups have reported
encouraging findings with steroid-free protocols including basiliximab induction
therapy (Filipponi 2004, Llado 2008, Becker 2008). A steroid-free alemtuzumab
induction regimen resulted in less hypertension and rejection but with more
infectious complications. So far, the overall benefit of alemtuzumab induction in LT
recipients remains questionnable (Levitsky 2011).
Figure 4. Non-melanoma skin scancers and liver transplantation (LT). Organ transplant
recipients have an increased risk of development of non-melanoma skin cancers as compared
to the non-transplant setting. Premalignant lesions such as actinic keratoses [A] are
predominantly located on sun-exposed areas. Squamous cell carcinoma [B,C] is the most
frequent skin cancer after LT followed by basal cell carcinoma [D] (Photographs kindly provided
by PD Dr. Hillen, Transplant Dermatology Outpatient Unit, Department of Dermatology,
University Hospital Essen, Germany).
De novo malignancies
Incidence of malignancies is higher in transplant patients and depends on the length
of follow-up, characteristics of the transplant population,  choice of
immunosuppression and era in which the LT was performed (Buell 2005, Fung
2001). A cumulative risk has been reported of 10%, 24%, 32% and 42% at 5, 10, 15
and 20 years, respectively, for development of de  novo  cancers after LT
(Finkenstedt 2009). The highest risks in the transplant setting are nonmelanoma skin
cancers, mainly squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma (Figure 4).
Premaligant lesions such as actinic keratoses are mostly located on sun-exposed
areas. Squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma are increased by factors of
~65-200 and ~10, respectively, in organ transplant recipients as compared to the
immunocompetent population (Ulrich 2008). An annual routine dermatological
Update in Transplant Hepatology  361
follow-up exam, limitation of sun exposure and protective measures including
sunscreens are highly recommended for transplant patients.
A higher incidence of colon cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease
who are transplanted for PSC has been reported in the literature (Hanouneh 2011). It
is therefore necessary to maintain an adequate colonoscopic surveillance in these
patients even in the absence of bowel  symptoms or active disease at regular
intervals (Fevery 2011). A trend has been recently reported toward an increased
incidence of advanced colon polyps and colon carcinoma in patients transplanted for
other diseases than PSC after LT. However, larger studies are needed to determine
whether post-transplant colon cancer surveillance should be performed more
frequently than in the non-transplant setting (Rudraraju 2008).
Recent studies reported a significantly higher incidence of aerodigestive cancer
including lung cancer among patients who underwent LT for alcohol-related liver
disease (Vallejo 2005, Jimenez 2005). A Spanish transplant group recommended
annual screening for oropharyngeal tumors in patients with a history of alcohol
overconsumption (Benlloch 2004).  SRL exerts antiangiogenic activities that are
linked to a decrease in production of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and
to a markedly inhibited response of vascular endothelial cells to stimulation by
vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (Guba 2002). Furthermore, the ability of
SRL to increase the expression of E-cadherin suggests a mechanism for blocking
regional tumor growth and for inhibiting metastatic progression. Therefore, we give
special consideration for mTOR inhibitor-based immunosuppressive regimens not
only patients transplanted for HCC but also those with de novo malignancies after
LT.
Biliary complications
Biliary leaks generally occur as an early post-transplant complication. In patients
with biliary stones, endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction are the
treatment of choice.
Biliary strictures are one of the most common complications after LT, with a
reported incidence of 5.8-34% (Graziadei 2006). Early anastomotic strictures (AS)
usually have a technical origin; while strictures appearing later have a multifactorial
origin. Nonanastomotic strictures (NAS) without underlying hepatic artery
thrombosis are commonly referred to as ischemic-type biliary lesions (ITBL).
Risk factors for ITBL include preservation-induced injury, prolonged cold and
warm ischemia times, altered bile composition, ABO blood incompatibility and
immunological injury (Verdonk 2007, Buis 2009).
Endoscopic  retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or percutaneous transhepatic
cholangiography (PTC) have typically been used as the primary approach, leaving
surgical intervention for those who are nonresponsive to endoscopic interventions or
who have diffuse intrahepatic bile duct damage. Novel radiological methods such as
magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) have been introduced as
an additional diagnostic tool for biliary complications.
The long-term efficacy and safety of endoscopic techniques have been evaluated
in various transplant centers (Qin 2006, Zoepf 2006, Pascher 2005).
Nonanastomotic strictures are commonly associated with a less favourable response
to interventional endoscopic therapy in comparison to anastomosis stenosis (Figure
5). An Austrian group found anastomotic strictures in 12.6% of patients transplanted
362  Hepatology 2012
between October 1992 and December 2003 and nonanastomic strictures in 3.7%
during a mean follow-up of 53.7 months after LT (Graziadei 2006). Interventional
endoscopic procedures were effective in 77% of patients with anastomosis stenosis;
whereas treatment of nonanastomotic strictures showed long-term effectiveness in
63% of patients. A surgical approach was required in 7.4% of transplant recipients.
Figure 5. Biliary tract complications after liver transplantation. A. Endoscopic retrograde
cholangiography (ERC) showing post-transplant short filiform anastomotic biliary stricture in a
46-year-old patient transplanted for HCV and alcohol-related cirrhosis 6 months earlier.
Therapy sessions include dilatation and an increasing number of bile duct endoprostheses at
short intervals of every 2-3 months. Prior to endoscopic therapy an endoscopic spinkterotomy is
performed. B. ERC of a 41-year-old patient transplanted for HCV diagnosed with ischemic-type
biliary lesions (type 3) with long nonanastomotic stricture extending proximally from the site of
the anastomosis and strictures throughout the entire liver.
Zoepf et al. (2006) retrospectively analyzed results from 75 transplanted patients
undergoing ERC for suspected anastomic strictures. Balloon dilatation alone and
combined dilatation and endoprotheses placement was efficacious in 89% and 87%
of cases respectively, but recurrence occurred in 62% and 31% of cases
respectively. We therefore use dilatation plus stenting with endoscopic reassessment
in anstomotic strictures. Repeated ERC sessions are performed with increasing
endoprothesis diameter in trimonthly time intervals and double or triple parallel
stenting in selected cases. Up to 75% of patients are stent-free after 18 months of
endoscopic intervention (Tung 1999).
Medical treatment for bile duct strictures consists of UDCA and additional
antibiotic treatment in stricture-induced cholangitis. Complications related to
bilioenteric anastomosis require PTC or surgical intervention.
Metabolic bone disease
Liver cirrhosis and therapy with corticosteroids are risk factors for the development
of osteoporosis. Screening with bone densitometry should therefore begin prior to
LT (Wibaux 2011). A further increase in bone turnover has been described after LT
and may be associated with resolution of cholestasis, increased parathormone
secretion and/or CNI administration (Moreira Kulak 2010). Metabolic bone disease
Update in Transplant Hepatology  363
is therefore a common cause of morbidity after LT. Factors such as vitamin D
deficiency, hypogonadism, secondary hyperparathyroidism and adverse lifestyle
factors should be addressed and corrected. There are no specific therapies for post-transplant osteoporosis other than for nontransplanted patients. General
interventions to reduce fracture risk include adequate intake of calcium and vitamin
D. Bisphosphonates are currently the most effective agents for treatment of post-transplant osteoporosis (Moreira Kulak 2010) (www.dv-osteologie.org). A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised controlled trials demonstrated that
bisphosphonate therapy within the first 12 months after LT is associated with
reduced accelerated bone loss and improved bone mineral density at the lumbar
spine (Kasturi 2010).
Recurrent diseases after liver transplantation
Disease recurrence may occur in patients transplanted for viral hepatitis, tumor
disease, autoimmune or cholestatic or alcohol-related liver diseases. With universal
recurrence of HCV in all replicative patients, hepatitis C continues to pose one of
the greatest challenges for preventing disease progression in the allograft.
Recurrence of hepatitis B in the allograft
Combined use of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ide analogs has
emerged as treatment of choice in transplant HBV recipients (Figure 6) (Yan 2006,
Marzano 2005, Cai 2011) and its efficacy has been investigated extensively. HBV
recurrence using combined prophylactic regimens is less than 5%. However,
recurrence rates differ among various studies as most of them are small, with
varying proportions of patients with active viral replication at LT and varying
follow-up periods after LT. Furthermore there is a high variability (dose, duration
and method of HBIG administration) in the prophylactic protocols. According to the
German guidelines (Cornberg 2011) patients receive 10,000 IU HBIG intravenously
(IV) in the anhepatic phase followed by 2000 IU during the first postransplant week.
For long-term HBIG prophylaxis, trough anti-HBs levels at or above 100 IU/L
should be maintained. Subcutaneous (SC) HBIG application has various advantages
over intramuscular (IM) and IV administration (Beckebaum 2008b, Yahyazadeh
2011) and can be administered in stable and compliant patients after the early post-transplant period. It is well tolerated and patients can perform injections in a home
setting, thus reducing physician consultation time. Nucleos(t)ide analogs given prior
to LT should be continued indefinitely post-transplant.
Economic issues have led to a controversial discussion of whether indefinite
passive immunisation is necessary and if nucleos(t)ide analog therapy is sufficient
for antiviral prophylaxis (Naoumov 2001, Buti 2007, Gane 2007, Angus 2007, Neff
2007, Lo 2005, Wong 2007, Nath 2006, Yoshida 2007, Weber 2010, Karlas 2011).
Post-transplant studies have described unacceptable 2-4 year rejection rates of
approximately 25-50% with LAM monotherapy and with no initial phase of HBIG
therapy (Table 5) (see http://hepatologytextbook.com/link.php?id=9) (Marzano
2001, Jiao 2007, Zheng 2006).
A prospective, open-label, multicenter study was conducted on the safety and
efficacy of combined LAM/ADV therapy in HBsAg-positive LT recipients (Gane
2007) (Table 5) (see http://hepatologytextbook.com/link.php?id=9). Patients with

Book on hepatitis from page 346 to 355

Book on hepatitis from page 346 to 355

346  Hepatology 2012
Therapeutic management of additional risk factors such as obesity and poorly
controlled diabetes mellitus provide additional chances for prophylactic measures to
reduce the risk of HCC development. Finally, consumption of two or more cups of
coffee per day seems to reduce the risk of liver cancer by 40-50% in patients with
chronic viral hepatitis (Gelatti 2005, Bravi 2007, Larsson 2007, Wakai 2007).
References
Abou-Alfa GK, Amadori D, Santoro A, et al. Safety and Efficacy of Sorafenib in Patients with
Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh A versus B Cirrhosis. Gastrointest
Cancer Res 2011;4:40-4. (Abstract)
Bralet MP, Regimbeau JM, Pineau P, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma occurring in nonfibrotic
liver: epidemiologic and histopathologic analysis of 80 French cases. Hepatology
2000;32:200-4. (Abstract)
Bravi F, Bosetti C, Tavani A, et al. Coffee drinking and hepatocellular carcinoma risk: a meta-analysis. Hepatology 2007;46:430-5. (Abstract)
Brunetto MR, Oliveri F, Coco B, Leandro G, Colombatto P, Gorin JM, Bonino F. Outcome of
anti-HBe positive chronic hepatitis B in alpha-interferon treated and untreated
patients: a long term cohort study. J Hepatol 2002;36:263-70. (Abstract)
Camma C, Giunta M, Andreone P, Craxi A. Interferon and prevention of hepatocellular
carcinoma in viral cirrhosis: an evidence-based approach. J Hepatol 2001;34:593-602. (Abstract)
Calle EE, Rodriguez C, Walker-Thurmond K, Thun MJ. Overweight, obesity, and mortality from
cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1625-38. (Abstract)
Chen CJ, Yang HI, Su J, et al. REVEAL-HBV Study Group. Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma
across a biological gradient of serum hepatitis B virus DNA level. JAMA 2006;295:65-73. (Abstract)
Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised,
double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:25-34. (Abstract)
Cho YK, Kim JK, Kim MY, Rhim H, Han JK. Systematic review of randomized trials for
hepatocellular carcinoma treated with percutaneous ablation therapies. Hepatology.
2009;49:453-9. (Abstract)
Davila JA, Morgan RO, Shaib Y, McGlynn KA, El-Serag HB. Diabetes increases the risk of
hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States: a population based case control study.
Gut 2005;54:533-9. (Abstract)
Donato F, Tagger A, Gelatti U, et al. Alcohol and hepatocellular carcinoma: the effect of lifetime
intake and hepatitis virus infections in men and women. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155:
323-31. (Abstract)
Falleti E, Fabris C, Cmet S, et al. PNPLA3 rs738409C/G polymorphism in cirrhosis: relationship
with the aetiology of liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma occurrence. Liver Int
2011;31:1137-43. (Abstract)
Gallo C, De Maio E, Di Maio M, et al, CLIP (Cancer of the Liver Italian Programme)
Investigators. Tamoxifen is not effective in good prognosis patients with
hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2006 24;6:196. (Abstract)
Gelatti U, Covolo L, Talamini R, et al. N-Acetyltransferase-2, glutathione S-transferase M1 and
T1 genetic polymorphisms, cigarette smoking and hepatocellular carcinoma: a case-control study. Int J Cancer 2005;115:301-6. (Abstract)
Gelatti U, Covolo L, Franceschini M, et al. Brescia HCC Study Group. Coffee consumption
reduces the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma independently of its aetiology: a case-control study. J Hepatol 2005;42:528-34. (Abstract)
Iloeje UH, Yang HI, Su J, Jen CL, You SL, Chen CJ, Risk Evaluation of Viral Load Elevation
and Associated Liver Disease/Cancer-In HBV (the REVEAL-HBV) Study Group.
Predicting cirrhosis risk based on the level of circulating hepatitis B viral load.
Gastroenterology 2006;130:678-86. (Abstract)
International Working Party. Pathologic diagnosis of early hepatocellular carcinoma: a report of
the international consensus group for hepatocellular neoplasia. Hepatology
2009;49:658-64 (Abstract)
Diagnosis, Prognosis & Therapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma  347
Jakobs TF, Hoffmann RT, Poepperl G, et al. Mid-term results in otherwise treatment refractory
primary or secondary liver confined tumours treated with selective internal radiation
therapy (SIRT) using (90)Yttrium resin-microspheres. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1320-30.
Lampertico P, Del Ninno E, Vigano M, et al. Long-term suppression of hepatitis B e antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B by 24-month interferon therapy. Hepatology
2003;37:756-63. (Abstract)
Larsson SC, Wolk A. Coffee consumption and risk of liver cancer: a meta-analysis.
Gastroenterology 2007;132:1740-5. (Abstract)
Liaw YF. Prevention and surveillance of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma.
Semin Liver Dis 2005;25 Suppl1:40-7. (Abstract)
Liu MD, Uaje MB, Al-Ghazi MS, et al. Use of Yttrium-90 TheraSphere for the treatment of
unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Am Surg 2004;70:947-53. (Abstract)
Livraghi T, Meloni F, Di Stasi M, Rolle E, Solbiati L, Tinelli C, Rossi S. Sustained complete
response and complications rates after radiofrequency ablation of very early
hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: Is resection still the treatment of choice?
Hepatology 2008;47:82-9. (Abstract)
Llovet JM, Bruix J. Systematic review of randomized trials for unresectable hepatocellular
carcinoma: Chemoembolization improves survival. Hepatology 2003;37:429-42.
(Abstract)
Llovet JM, Bustamante J, Castells A, et al. Natural history of untreated nonsurgical
hepatocellular carcinoma: rationale for the design and evaluation of therapeutic trials.
Hepatology 1999;29:62-7. (Abstract)
Llovet JM, Real MI, Montana X, et al. Barcelona Liver Cancer Group. Arterial embolisation or
chemoembolisation versus symptomatic treatment in patients with unresectable
hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 359:1734-9.
(Abstract)
Lok AS. Prevention of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology.
2004;127(Suppl 1):S303-9.
Lopez P, Villanueva A, Llovet JM. Updated systematic review of randomized controlled trials in
hepatocellular carcinoma. 2002-2005. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 23:1535-1547.
(Abstract)
Mazzaferro V, Regalia E, Doci R, et al. Liver transplantation for the treatment of small
hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 1996;334:693-9.
(Abstract)
Nischalke HD, Berger C, Luda C, et al. The PNPLA3 rs738409 148M/M Genotype Is a Risk
Factor for Liver Cancer in Alcoholic Cirrhosis but Shows No or Weak Association in
Hepatitis C Cirrhosis. PLoS One 2011;6:e27087. (Abstract)
Otto G, Herber S, Heise M, et al. Response to transarterial chemoembolization as a biological
selection criterion for liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl
2006;12:1260-7. (Abstract)
Papatheodoridis GV, Manesis E, Hadziyannis SJ. The long-term outcome of interferon-alpha
treated and untreated patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol
2001;34:306-13. (Abstract)
Papatheodoridis GV, Papadimitropoulos VC, Hadziyannis SJ. Effect of interferon therapy on the
development of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis C virus-related
cirrhosis: a meta-analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2001;15:689-98. (Abstract)
Papatheodoridis GV, Manolakopoulos S, Touloumi G, et al.; HEPNET. Greece Cohort Study
Group. Virological suppression does not prevent the development of hepatocellular
carcinoma in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B patients with cirrhosis receiving oral
antiviral(s) starting with lamivudine monotherapy: results of the nationwide HEPNET.
Greece cohort study. Gut 2011;60:1109-16.
Papatheodoridis GV, Lampertico P, Manolakopoulos S, Lok A. Incidence of hepatocellular
carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving nucleos(t)ide therapy: a
systematic review. J Hepatol 2010;53:348-56. (Abstract)
Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin
2005;55:74-108. (Abstract)
Pawlik TM, Reyes DK, Cosgrove D, Kamel IR, Bhagat N, Geschwind JF. Phase II trial of
sorafenib combined with concurrent transarterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting beads for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:3960-7. (Abstract)
348  Hepatology 2012
Pomfret EA, Washburn K, Wald C, et al. Report of a national conference on liver allocation
inpatients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States. Liver Transpl.
2010;16:262-78 (Abstract)
Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM, Liu CL, Wong J. Difference in tumor invasiveness in cirrhotic patients
with hepatocellular carcinoma fulfilling the Milan criteria treated by resection and
transplantation: impact on long-term survival. Ann Surg 2007;245:51-8. (Abstract)
Salem R, Hunter RD. Yttrium-90 microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a
review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66(2 Suppl):S83-8. (Abstract)
Sangro B, Bilbao JI, Boan J, et al. Radioembolization using 90Y-resin microspheres for patients
with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:792-800. (Abstract)
van Zonneveld M, Honkoop P, Hansen BE, et al. Long-term follow-up of alpha-interferon
treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2004;39:804-10. (Abstract)
Veldt BJ, Saracco G, Boyer N, et al. Long term clinical outcome of chronic hepatitis C patients
with sustained virological response to interferon monotherapy. Gut 2004;53:1504-8.
(Abstract)
Wakai K, Kurozawa Y, Shibata A, et al. JACC Study Group. Liver cancer risk, coffee, and
hepatitis C virus infection: a nested case-control study in Japan. Br J Cancer
2007;97:426-8. (Abstract)
Vilana R, Forner A, Bianchi L, et al. Intrahepatic peripheral cholangiocarcinoma in cirrhosis
patients may display a vascular pattern similar to hepatocellular carcinoma on
contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Hepatology 2010;51:2020-9. (Abstract)
Yao FY. Should surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma be increased in patients with cirrhosis
and small liver nodules? Nature Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;3:544-5.
(Abstract)
Yao FY, Ferrell L, Bass NM, et al. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: expansion
of the tumor size limits does not adversely impact survival. Hepatology
2001;33:1394-403. (Abstract)
Yu ML, Lin SM, Lee CM, et al. A simple noninvasive index for predicting long-term outcome of
chronic hepatitis C after interferon-based therapy. Hepatology 2006;44:1086-97.
(Abstract)
Yuen MF, Poon RT, Lai CL, et al. A randomized placebo-controlled study of long-acting
octreotide for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology
2002;36:687-91. (Abstract)
Zhang BH, Yang BH, Tang ZY. Randomized controlled trial of screening for hepatocellular
carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004;130:417-422. (Abstract)
Update in Transplant Hepatology  349
22. Update in Transplant Hepatology
S. Beckebaum, G. Gerken, V. R. Cicinnati
Introduction
The first attempt at heterotopic grafting of a liver in a dog was reported more than
50 years ago (Welch 1955). The first known experimental orthotopic liver
transplantation (LT) was reported in 1956 at the University of California (Cannon
1956). In the early sixties, a human-to-human LT was performed in a 3-year-old
child with congenital biliary atresia who died intraoperatively (Starzl 1963). The
next two transplant recipients lived for 22 days and 1 week, respectively (Starzl
1963). Starzl finally transplanted several patients with success in 1967 (Starzl
1968).
With the advances in immunosuppression, surgical techniques, organ preservation
and improvements in patient management, LT has become the gold standard in the
treatment of advanced chronic liver disease and fulminant hepatic failure. This
chapter focuses on important issues in the field of transplant hepatology and may
provide helpful information to physicians involved in the care of adult LT
recipients. It includes indications for LT, current organ allocation policy,
pretransplant evaluation, management while on the waiting list, living donor liver
transplantation (LDLT), and management of early and long-term complications
post-LT.
Timing and indications for liver transplantation
Appropriate selection of candidates and timing of LT is crucial in reducing
mortality and improving outcomes in LT recipients. A patient is considered too
healthy to undergo LT if the expected survival is greater without LT. Therefore,
criteria are needed in order to select patients who can most benefit from
transplantation. In 2002, the  Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network,
along with the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS), developed a new system
based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) (Table 1) to prioritize
patients on the waiting list. In the Eurotransplant countries, the Child-Pugh Turcotte
score was replaced by the MELD score in December 2006.
350  Hepatology 2012
The lab MELD score is a numerical scale using the three laboratory parameters
depicted in Table 1 and ranging from 6 (less ill) to 40 (severely ill).
In a large study (Merion 2005) investigating the survival benefit of LT candidates,
those transplanted with a MELD score <15 had a significantly higher mortality risk
as compared to those remaining on the waiting list, while candidates with a MELD
score of 18 or higher had a significant transplant benefit.
Table 1. Calculation of the MELD* Score.
MELD Score = 0.957 x log (creatinine mg/dL)
0.378 x log (bilirubin mg/dL)
1.120 x log (INR**)
+ 0.643
*Model of End-stage Liver Disease
**International Normalized Ratio
However, the MELD score does not accurately predict mortality in approximately
15-20% of patients. Therefore MELD-based allocation allows exceptions for
patients whose score may not reflect the severity of their liver disease. These
exceptions include hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), non-metastatic
hepatoblastoma, adult polycystic liver degeneration, primary hyperoxaluria type 1,
small for size syndrome, cystic fibrosis, familial amyloid polyneuropathy,
hepatopulmonary syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, urea cycle disorders,
hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (Osler-Weber-Rendu disease),
hemangioendothelioma of the liver, biliary sepsis, primary sclerosing cholangitis
(PSC) and cholangiocarcinoma. Patients with standard exceptions will be assigned a
higher MELD score (match MELD) than that assigned by the patient’s laboratory
test results (lab MELD). This results in an increasing proportion of patients
transplanted for HCC and other exceptions over time (Massie 2011).
MELD has proved to be accurate as a predictor of waiting list mortality, but has
shown to be less accurate to predict post-transplant outcome. For instance, MELD
allocation resulted in decreased waiting list mortality; whereas post-transplant
morbidity has increased due to transplantation of a higher proportion of sicker
recipients with MELD scores >30 (Dutkowski 2011). Moreover, since the
introduction of MELD, the quality of donor organs has been impaired and the
threshold for organ allocation has increased from a match MELD of 25 to 34
(Schlitt 2011).
A potential modification of the MELD allocation system currently under
investigation is to allocate organs by not only taking into account pretransplant
mortality but also donor-related factors for estimation of the donor risk index (DRI)
(Feng 2006) and post-transplant mortality.
Furthermore, standardization of laboratory assays and variants of MELD
including incorporation of parameters such as sodium or cholinesterase have been
proposed to overcome the limitations of the current scoring system (Choi 2009,
Weissmüller 2008).
Candidates for LT must have irreversible acute or chronic end-stage liver disease.
Hepatitis C virus (HCV)- or alcohol-induced liver disease account for the most
common disease indications in adults with liver cirrhosis  (http://www.eltr.org)
(Figure 1). Other indications include cholestatic liver disorders (primary biliary
Update in Transplant Hepatology  351
cirrhosis [PBC], PSC), hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, autoimmune hepatitis
(AIH), inherited metabolic diseases (Wilson’s Disease, hemochromatosis, α-1-antitrypsin deficiency), nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, HCC, and acute or acute-on-chronic hepatic failure. In children, biliary atresia and metabolic liver diseases are
the most common indications. Contraindications for LT include active alcohol and
drug abuse, extrahepatic malignancies, sepsis, uncontrolled pulmonary
hypertension, and coexistent medical disorders such as severe cardiopulmonary
condition, technical or anatomical barriers such as thrombosis of the entire portal
and superior mesenteric venous system. Previous malignancy history must be
carefully considered and likelihood of recurrence estimated.
Figure 1. Indications for liver transplantation (LT). Primary diseases leading to LT in Europe
1988 - 2010 (Data kindly provided from European Liver Transplant Registry,
http://www.eltr.org).
Patient evaluation
Evaluation of a potential transplant candidate is a complex and time-consuming
process that requires a multidisciplinary approach. Requirements for evaluation may
differ slightly between transplant centers. The evaluation process must identify
extrahepatic diseases that may exclude the patient from transplantation or require
treatment before surgical intervention. The protocol we use for evaluation of
potential transplant candidates is shown in Table 2.
Pretransplant management issues
In cases of recurrent variceal hemorrhage despite prior interventional endoscopic
therapy (and non-selective beta-blockade) or refractory ascites, transjugular
intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) have been used as an approach to lower
portal pressure and as a bridging therapy for transplant candidates. The
identification of predisposing factors and the application of lactulose, nonabsorbed
antibiotics and protein-restricted diets remain essential for prophylaxis and
management of hepatic encephalopathy (HE).
352  Hepatology 2012
Table 2. Evaluation protocol for potential transplant candidates.
  Physical examination
  Diagnostic tests (baseline laboratory testing; serologic, tumor/virologic, and
microbiological screening; autoantibodies; thyroid function tests)
  Ultrasonography with Doppler
  Abdominal MRI or CT scan
  Chest X-rays
  Electrocardiogram (ECG), stress ECG, 2-dimensional echocardiography (if
abnormal or risk factors are present: further cardiological screening)
  Upper and lower endoscopy
  Pulmonary function testing
  Mammography (females >35 years)
  Physician consultations (anesthesiologist, gynecologist, urologist, cardiologist,
neurologist, dentist, ENT physician)
  A meticulous psychosocial case review (medical specialist in psychosomatic
medicine, psychiatry or psychology)
Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) represents a complication of end-stage liver disease
and is a risk factor for acute kidney injury (AKI) in the early postoperative phase
(Saner 2011). It is classified into type 1 HRS characterized by a rapid impairment of
renal function with a poor prognosis; type 2 HRS is a moderate steady renal
impairment. Vasoconstrictors including commonly used terlipressin in combination
with volume expansion, have been shown to be effective for restoration of arterial
blood flow and serve as a bridging therapy to LT. Extracorporeal liver support
systems based on exchange or detoxification of albumin have been successfully
employed in indicated cases. After wait-listing, laboratory values must be updated
according to the recertification schedule shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Recertification schedule of MELD data.
Score  Recertification  Lab values
≥25  every 7 days  ≤48 hours old
24-19  every 30 days  ≤7 days old
18-11  every 90 days  ≤14 days old
≤10  every year  ≤30 days old
Special attention regarding specific, disease-related therapy prior to surgery
should be given to transplant candidates undergoing LT for HCC or virally-related
liver diseases.
Waiting list monitoring of hepatitis B liver transplant
candidates
The goal of antiviral therapy in HBV patients on the waiting list is to achieve viral
suppression to undetectable HBV DNA levels using sensitive tests (Figure 2)
(Cornberg 2011). Several studies have demonstrated clinical benefits under viral
suppression in patients with decompensated cirrhosis as reflected by a decrease in
CPT score, improvement of liver values and resolution of clinical complications
(Kapoor 2000, Schiff 2007, Nikolaidis 2005).
Update in Transplant Hepatology  353
Figure 2. Management of HBV patients prior to liver transplantation (LT). In all viremic
patients awaiting LT for HBV-related liver damage, efficient antiviral therapy is required.
Suppression of HBV DNA may lead to clinical stabilisation resulting in removal from the waiting
list or in a delay in the need for LT. Neg., negative, pos., positive.
A major concern of long-term lamivudine (LAM) therapy is the emergence of
mutations in the YMDD motif of the DNA polymerase which could result in clinical
decompensation in patients with liver cirrhosis (Beckebaum 2008, Beckebaum
2009). Therefore potent nucleos(t)ide analogs (entecavir [ETV] or tenofovir [TDF])
with a high resistance barrier are preferred.
Waiting list monitoring and treatment of hepatitis C liver
transplant candidates
The number of studies investigating the tolerability and efficacy of antiviral therapy
in HCV patients before LT is limited (Crippin 2002, Iacobellis 2007, Everson 2005,
Triantos 2005). Wait-listed patients who have a viral response on antiviral therapy
have a lower reinfection rate and better outcome after LT (Thomas 2003, Picciotto
2007). Thus, there is an indication for therapy with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN)
plus ribavirin (RBV) in patients with compensated HCV cirrhosis on the waiting
list. Results from antiviral clinical studies show sustained viral response (SVR) rates
between 20% and 40% (Melero 2009). Adverse effects are frequent including
cytopenias, bacterial infections and hepatic decompensation requiring dose
reduction or treatment withdrawal. Hematopoietic growth factors have shown to
increase patient compliance and to avoid dose reductions, but it remains
questionable whether they result in higher SVR rates. Antiviral therapy in
decompensated cirrhosis and with MELD score ≥18 should be restricted to selected
cases and monitored by a transplant center.
Adjunctive treatment and staging of HCC transplant
candidates
Under MELD allocation, patients must meet the Milan criteria (one tumor ≤5 cm in
diameter or up to three tumors, all ≤3 cm) to qualify for exceptional HCC waiting
list consideration. Diagnosis of HCC is confirmed if the following criteria are met
according to the German Guidelines for Organ Transplantation
(Bundesärztekammer 2008): (1) liver biopsy-proven or (2) AFP >400 ng/mL and
hypervascular liver lesion detectable in one imaging technique (magnetic resonance
354  Hepatology 2012
imaging [MRI], spiral computed tomography [CT], angiography) or (3)
hypervascular liver lesion detectable in 2 different imaging techniques. Patients are
registered at a MELD score equivalent to a 15% probability of pretransplant death
within 3 months. Patients will receive additional MELD points equivalent to a 10%
increase in pretransplant mortality to be assigned every 3 months until these patients
receive a transplant or become unsuitable for LT due to progression of their HCC.
The listing center must enter an updated MELD score exception application in order
to receive additional MELD points. The  US National Conference on Liver
Allocation in Patients with HCC recommended the introduction of a calculated
continuous HCC priority score, that incorporates the MELD score, AFP level and
rate of tumor growth, for identifying patients with a good vs. a poor outcome
(Pomfret 2010). Further investigations are necessary to determine the survival
benefit of HCC patients considering these features.
Pre-listing, the patient should undergo a thorough assessment to rule out
extrahepatic spread and/or vascular invasion. The assessment should include CT
scan or MRI of the abdomen, pelvis and chest. We perform trimonthly routine
follow-up examinations (MRI or CT scan) of wait-listed HCC patients for early
detection of disease progression. It has been shown that waiting list drop-out rates
can be reduced by the application  of bridging therapies such as transarterial
chemoembolisation or radiofrequency ablation (Roayie 2007). Recently,
transarterial radionuclide therapies such as Yttrium-90 microsphere transarterial
radioembolisation (TARE) have been tested for bridging therapy in selected cases
(Toso 2010, Khalaf 2010). Bridging therapy should be considered in particular in
patients outside of the Milan criteria, with a likely waiting time of longer than 6
months and those within the Milan criteria with high-risk characteristics of HCC.
Sorafenib has been administered in a few studies before LT to investigate the safety
and efficacy of this oral multikinase inhibitor in the neoadjuvant setting (Fijiki
2011, Di Benedetto 2011).
Accurate discrimination of HCC patients with good and poor prognosis by
specific criteria (genomic or molecular strategies) is highly warranted to select
appropriate treatment options (Tournoux-Facon 2011, Marsh 2003, Finkelstein
2003). In patients with alcohol-related liver disease and HCC, a multidisciplinary
approach and thorough work-up of both the alcoholic and oncologic problem is
mandatory (Sotiropoulos 2008a).
Living donor liver transplantation: indications,
donor evaluation, and outcome
LDLT was introduced in 1989 with a successful series of pediatric patients
(Broelsch 1991). Adult-to-adult LDLT (ALDLT) was first performed in Asian
countries where cadaveric organ donation is rarely practiced (Sugawara 1999,
Kawasaki 1998). LDLT peaked in the US in 2001 (Qiu 2005) but therafter the
numbers declined by 30% over the following years (Vagefi 2011). A decline over
time was also observed in Europe, although LDLT activity increased in Asia (Moon
2011).
The evaluation of donors is a cost-effective although time-consuming process.
Clinical examinations, imaging studies, special examinations, biochemical
parameters, and psychosocial evaluation prior to donation varies from center to
Update in Transplant Hepatology  355
center and has been described elsewhere (Valentin-Gamazo 2004). Using Germany
as an example, the expenses for evaluation, hospital admission, surgical procedure,
and follow-up examinations of donors are paid by the recipient’s insurance. Due to
the increasing number of potential candidates and more stringent selection criteria,
rejection of potential donors has been reported in about 69-86% of cases (Valentin-Gamazo 2004, Pascher 2002). The advantages of LDLT include the feasibilty of
performing the operation when medically indicated and the short duration of cold
ischemia time.
The surgical procedures for LDLT are more technically challenging than those for
cadaver LT. In the recipient operation, bile duct reconstruction has proven to be the
most challenging part of the procedure with biliary complications ranging from 15%
to 60% (Sugawara 2005).
Regarding donor outcome, morbidity rates vary considerably in the literature
(Patel 2007, Beavers 2002). Possible complications include wound infection,
pulmonary problems, vascular thrombosis with biliary leaks, strictures, and
incisional hernia. Biliary complications are the most common postoperative
complication in LDLT and occur in up to 7% of donors (Perkins 2008, Sugawara
2005). Liver regeneration can be documented with imaging studies and confirmed
by normalization of bilirubin, liver enzymes, and synthesis parameters. LDLT
should be performed only by established transplant centres with appropriate medical
expertise.
Perioperative complications
Cardiac decompensation, respiratory failure following reperfusion, and kidney
failure in the perioperative LT setting constitutes a major challenge for the intensive
care unit. Early dialysis has been shown to be beneficial in patients with severe
acute kidney injury (AKI) (stage III according to the classification of the Acute
Kidney Injury Network) (Bellomo 2004), whereas treatment with dopamine or loop
diuretics have shown to be associated with worse outcome. Preventative strategies
of AKI include avoidance of volume depletion and maintenance of a mean arterial
pressure >65 mmHg (Saner 2011).
Despite advances in organ preservation and technical procedures, postoperative
complications due to preservation/reperfusion injury have not markedly decreased
over the past several years. Typical histological features of preservation and
reperfusion injury include centrilobular pallor and ballooning degeneration of
hepatocytes. Bile duct cells are more sensitive to reperfusion injury than
hepatocytes (Washington 2005) resulting in increased levels of bilirubin, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) and alkaline phosphatase (AP). Vascular
complications such as hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) occur in 1.6-4% of patients.
Thus, Doppler exams of the hepatic artery and portal vein are frequently performed
in the early postoperative setting. HAT in the early postoperative period can be
managed with thrombectomy. Late HAT with complication of bile duct strictures is
managed by interventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) but
requires retransplantation in the majority of patients. Early portal vein thrombosis is
rare (<1%) but may lead to graft loss if not revascularized.
Primary non-functioning graft (PNFG) may be clinically obvious immediately
after revascularization of the allograft. Early signs of liver dysfunction include
prolonged coagulation times, elevated liver enzymes (transaminases, cholestasis

.

Powered By Blogger

Search This Blog