Liver transplantation: Indications and general considerations

Chapter 97A Liver transplantation


Indications and general considerations




Overview


The first human orthotopic liver transplantation was carried out by Starzl in 1963. In the subsequent 2 decades, only a relatively small number of grafts were placed, usually in moribund patients with end-stage disease, and survival results were disappointing; however, with increasing experience and confidence, results began to improve, and more patients were grafted. A major increase has been seen in both the number of transplant centers and the number of patients grafted. In both Europe and the United States, more than 6000 procedures are performed annually. Results are such that many centers are currently reporting 1-year survival rates in excess of 90% in elective cases.


It is difficult to identify any one cause for the increase in success. The contribution of better surgical and anesthetic techniques, improved postoperative care, and availability of better immunosuppressive agents have all contributed to the improvements in survival (see Chapter 97B). In addition, understanding of both indications and contraindications for the procedure have improved such that major surgery is not carried out in patients with virtually no chance of surviving, and patients are referred for transplantation at a stage when they are likely to have the greatest chance of success.


Increasing success of liver transplantation and the reduction in contraindications has meant that the number of potential recipients is increasing, while the number of donors in many countries is either remaining static or else actually falling. The increasing discrepancy between supply and demand means that the mortality of patients awaiting transplantation is increasing; patients who wait longer are sicker, and their chances of survival decreases, while resource utilization increases. Attempts to increase the donor pool by use of split livers, organs from selected non–heart-beating donors, and from living donors combined with a better understanding of the contraindications to grafts have had a significant impact but have not been sufficient to meet the need.


In North America and in some European countries, the method of allocation has been changed to one based on the patient’s prognosis, such as the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), with livers allocated to individuals based primarily on the likelihood of the recipient dying while awaiting transplantation. Use of this system has resulted in a major reduction in the mortality of patients awaiting liver transplantation without an appreciable effect on outcome after transplantation.



General Indications


In general, the indications for transplantation are relatively easy to define, although the application of these principles is often far more difficult. The two broad indications for grafting are a less than 1-year estimated survival of liver disease and a quality of life deemed unacceptable by the patient. The main contraindications to liver transplantation are numerous, and although some are relative, some are absolute.




Relative Contraindications to Transplantation




The last decade has shown a changing pattern of indications for transplantation. The total number of patients grafted each year in North America has risen from 1713 in 1988 to 6319 in 2008. Similar observations have been reported in Europe. Over the decades, the practice of transplantation has undergone many changes: the proportion of patients grafted for alcoholic liver disease and viral hepatitis, especially hepatitis C virus (HCV), is rising; whereas the proportion of patients grafted for malignancy and cholestatic diseases is falling.


The use of living donors has not made a significant impact on the number of transplantations. According to United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), of the 6319 liver transplantations done in 2008, only 249 (3.9%) were from living donors, and in fact the proportion of living-donor grafts decreased from 10% in 2001 to 3.9% in 2008. In contrast to living donors, use of non–heart-beating donor livers from those who donate after cardiac death has been increasing (0.5% in 1998 vs. 5% in 2007). In addition, new indications for liver transplantation include those with replicative hepatitis B virus (HBV) and for those with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.



General Aspects



Nutrition


Malnutrition is a common finding in end-stage cirrhosis, with a prevalence of 81% (Caregaro et al, 1996). Malnutrition in these patients has many causes: the disease depletes the patient, and the situation is compounded by poor intake, malabsorption, and dietary restrictions that are often inappropriate. Malnutrition is associated with increased susceptibility to infection and poor healing. Although in liver disease, the degree of malnutrition may be difficult to quantify, malnourished patients fare poorly, with reported mortality of 15% (Campillo et al, 2003). Although no convincing evidence proves that improvement in nutrition alters the outcome, it seems prudent to optimize nutrition (Figueiredo et al, 2000), and it is sensible to correct vitamin and other nutrition deficiencies.



Psychologic Assessment


Transplantation is associated with major psychologic stress, both for the patient and the family. More than half of those in the liver transplant candidate population have a wide range of psychologic health problems (Day et al, 2009). Initially, many centers arranged for full psychologic and psychiatric assessment of all potential transplant candidates, but this is rarely undertaken. Chronic ill health, possible subclinical encephalopathy, and future uncertainties all combine to make it difficult to accurately predict a patient’s outcome. In addition, when a history of psychiatric illness is present, expert assessment is required. Some patients with psychiatric illness that is unresponsive to therapy and those with a history of recurrent episodes of self-harm may not be suitable candidates for transplantation.



Age


There is no agreed upper age limit, but advanced age is associated independently with mortality after transplant (Burroughs et al, 2006). The concept of biologic age has superseded that of chronologic age, although the former cannot readily be defined or quantified.




Infection


Active bacterial, fungal, or protozoal sepsis is an absolute contraindication to transplantation, but once appropriate therapy has been instituted, the patient may become a suitable candidate for the procedure.



Human Immunodeficiency Virus


Although early studies showed patients with HIV infection fared poorly (Rubin et al, 1987; Tzakis et al, 1990), with the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), the natural history of HIV infection has been greatly altered (Roland & Stock, 2006), although patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection are at high risk for developing end-stage liver disease (Graham et al, 2001). Short-term outcomes in patients with HIV are encouraging (Fung et al, 2004), but the procedure remains limited to a few centers. Indications are becoming better defined (Samuel et al, 2003) and include 1) end-stage liver disease, 2) low or undetectable levels of HIV RNA, 3) no autoimmune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)-defining complication, and 4) a CD4 count greater than 200/mL.



Cardiovascular Disease


As with other diseases, the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular diseases will dictate whether liver replacement is an appropriate therapy. Multivessel, moderate to severe coronary artery disease is present in 15% of patients with end-stage liver disease (Tiukinhoy-Laing et al, 2006). Preoperative assessment of cardiovascular status is, at best, imprecise, as no clear guidelines exist to define limits below which grafting is unsafe. When it is possible to correct coronary artery disease, this should be undertaken prior to transplantation.



Respiratory Function


Arterial hypoxemia, an oxygen saturation less than 92% or arterial oxygen pressure less than 70 mm Hg, may be found in up to 70% of patients with liver disease. Several possible causes for this hypoxemia include ventilation-perfusion mismatch, diffusion limitation, alveolar hypoventilation, shunt, and diffusion-perfusion abnormality (Krowka & Cortese, 1990). Furthermore, pulmonary dysfunction is present in up to 2% of patients with advanced liver disease. The presence of significant pulmonary disease is usually apparent on history and examination, but significant pulmonary disease may be cryptic. The many possible causes for these abnormalities include 1) diseases unrelated to the liver, such as those caused by smoking; 2) organic liver disease, such as α1-antitrypsin deficiency; 3) respiratory conditions associated with certain liver disease, such as fibrosing alveolitis associated with primary biliary cirrhosis; 4) the effects of the liver disease on respiratory function, such as ascites that causes a pleural effusion or simple lung compression; 5) hepatopulmonary syndrome, and 6) portopulmonary hypertension.



Hepatopulmonary Syndrome


Hepatopulmonary syndrome is characterized by abnormal intrapulmonary vascular dilation (Hoeper et al, 2004). Clinically, it encompasses a triad of arterial deoxygenation, intrapulmonary vascular dilation, and liver disorder. The diagnosis is suggested by showing orthodeoxia, a fall in arterial blood oxygen when standing, and the presence of intrapulmonary shunting, demonstrated by either bubble echocardiography or nuclear medicine scanning.



Portopulmonary Hypertension


Portopulmonary hypertension results from pulmonary vasoconstriction and leads to vascular remodeling, which results in pulmonary hypertension (Hoeper et al, 2004). Diagnostic criteria include presence of liver disease that results in portal hypertension; mean pulmonary arterial pressure of more than 25 mm Hg at rest or 30 mm Hg during exercise; mean pulmonary artery occlusion pressure of less than 15 mm Hg; and pulmonary vascular resistance more than 240 dyn/sec/cm−5 (Krowka, 2003).


Routine screening of patients with chest radiograph, electrocardiogram (ECG), lung function tests, and measurement of peripheral oxygen saturation will usually identify those with pulmonary problems. Additional investigations include assessment of arterial blood gases—both lying and standing, to detect hepatopulmonary syndrome—and on 100% oxygen, to detect shunting; imaging with high-resolution computed tomography (CT) scanning, contrast-enhanced echocardiography, and isotope-labeled macroaggregated albumin lung scan are also helpful. Pulmonary angiography and right-heart catheterization may also be indicated as suggested by the clinical and simple investigations.


No clear guidelines are available that establish when liver transplantation is contraindicated because of pulmonary disease (Krowka et al, 2004). A preoperative partial pressure of oxygen of less than 50 mm Hg and a lung scan with brain uptake of more than 20% (Arguedas et al, 2003) strongly predict mortality, although these patients may be candidates for a triple transplant of heart, lung, and liver. Similar considerations apply to those with cystic fibrosis, cystic lung disease, and liver disease. Long-term oxygen therapy is the most frequently recommended therapy for symptomatic hypoxemic patients, but the use of drugs and transjugular intrahepatic shunt (TIPS) requires validation in this setting.



Coexisting Disease


The presence of coexisting disease may affect the decision to offer the patient a liver graft, either because the prospects of recovery are adversely affected, or because long-term survival may be reduced (Volk et al, 2007). Diabetes mellitus (DM) is commonly found in patients with chronic liver disease, especially in those with HCV infection. DM may occur as a consequence of the insulin intolerance associated with advanced liver disease; if so, it will resolve after successful transplantation. Concerns for those with diabetes center upon the possible microvascular complications. Evidence of a proliferative retinopathy, diabetic nephropathy, or autonomic neuropathy—evidenced by simple tests, such as abnormal beat-to-beat variation on Valsalva maneuver or postural hypotension—may be relative contraindications for transplantation. The presence of advanced microvascular disease puts the patient at risk of major autonomic disruption during the procedure, and the survival of such patients is relatively poor (Haydon & Neuberger, 2001).


Hyponatremia is a common finding in patients with advanced chronic liver disease, and it usually occurs either as a consequence of injudicious diuretic therapy or because of the reduced free-water clearance. Grafting patients with severe hyponatremia (serum sodium <120 mmol/L) has shown an increased risk of central pontine myelinolysis (Yun et al, 2009). Significant hyponatremia should be corrected prior to transplantation, either by simple water restriction and, if appropriate, cessation of diuretic therapy or, if more rapid correction is required, by use of renal support (Elias & McMaster, 1987). The role of aquaretics may also be helpful in this situation (O’Leary & Davis, 2009).


Vascular thromboses are not uncommon in patients with chronic liver disease. These may occur as a consequence of the cirrhosis itself or as part of an associated underlying thrombotic tendency; for example, the myeloproliferative disease associated with Budd-Chiari syndrome, the presence of lupus anticoagulant, deficiency of proteins C or S, or impaired fibrinolysis. In early series, portal vein thrombosis was considered to be a contraindication to transplantation, but it is now appreciated that this is no longer the case, and portal venous inflow to the graft can be provided by the superior mesenteric vein or even by a splenic vein. It is only in those rare patients in whom venous thrombosis is extensive, and where it is impossible to provide a suitable portal supply to the graft, that transplantation is actually contraindicated.


Renal disease may occur either as a consequence of the hepatorenal syndrome or as a result of intrinsic kidney damage. In the hepatorenal syndrome, the kidney is not structurally damaged, and once good liver function is reestablished, the kidney will function normally; so although the prognosis may be poorer in the presence of advanced renal insufficiency (Rimola et al, 1987), the hepatorenal syndrome is not an absolute contraindication to transplantation. When coexisting advanced renal disease is evident, it may be advisable to consider combined liver and kidney transplantation, as renal function remains a major predictive factor for the outcome after transplantation (Nair et al, 2002). It is uncertain whether pretransplant correction of renal parameters—for example, by dialysis—is associated with an improvement in survival.


Past history of malignancy is a relative contraindication to transplantation, because the effect of surgery and the consequent immunosuppression may predispose the patient to early recurrence of tumor (Penn, 1993; Saigal et al, 2001). In 1993, Penn identified those tumors that have a high risk of recurrence after transplantation (Box 97A.1). Most centers will offer transplantation when the risk of recurrence is below 10% at 5 years; however, recurrence rates with other kinds of malignancies—colorectal cancer (18.8%), nonmelanoma skin cancers (23.5%), thyroid carcinoma (25%), oral squamous carcionoma (33%), vulvovaginal cancers (33%), and breast carcinoma (33%)—are associated with a higher risk following liver transplantion (Benten et al, 2008). In only exceptional cases should patients with any of the above extrahepatic malignancies be considered suitable candidates for transplantation.





Specific Diseases



Fulminant Hepatic Failure (See Chapter 97C)


In recent years it has been realized that liver transplantation is an effective form of therapy for patients with fulminant hepatic failure (FHF), that is, the presence of encephalopathy occurring within 8 weeks of the onset of symptoms in a patient with previously normal liver (Peleman et al, 1987; Chapter 97C). FHF requiring transplantation accounts for less than 5% of liver transplantations. In those with severe FHF and grade 4 hepatic encephalopathy, the mortality approaches 80%. Common causes of FHF include paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose; viral infections, such as hepatitis A, B, E, and rarely C; drug and xenobiotic toxicity, including those caused by herbal remedies; Wilson disease; and liver diseases of pregnancy.


Patients with FHF develop early multiorgan failure and require intensive supportive therapy. The common causes of death are cerebral edema, multiorgan failure, sepsis (bacterial or fungal), cardiac arrhythmia or arrest, and respiratory failure (Ostapowicz et al, 2002). Indeed, FHF poses a difficult problem, because the window is very narrow between the time when it is apparent that the patient’s survival is likely to be poor in the absence of transplantation and the onset of irreversible complications that preclude a successful outcome.


Several groups have now published prognostic factors, and based on those, criteria for super-urgent transplantation in the United Kingdom have been published; these are listed in Table 97A.1 (Bismuth et al, 1987; Neuberger et al, 2008; O’Grady et al, 1989). The King’s College model has been validated in other centers and was found to be robust, although it is likely that with advances in the medical management of patients with FHF, these prognostic factors will require modification. The inclusion of serum lactate in the King’s College prognostic criteria provides greater accuracy (Riordan & Williams, 2002).


Table 97A.1 Current Transplant Criteria in the United Kingdom for Registration as a Super-Urgent Transplantation for Fulminant Hepatic Failure




































Category Etiology
1 Acetaminophen poisoning with pH <7.25 >24 h after overdose and after fluid resuscitation
2 Acetaminophen poisoning with PT >100 sec, or INR >6.5 and serum creatinine >300 mmol/L, or anuria and grade 3 to 4 encephalopathy
3 Acetaminophen poisoning with serum lactate level >24 h after overdose >3.5 mmol/L on admission or >3.0 mmol/L after fluid resuscitation
4 Acetaminophen poisoning with 2 of the 3 criteria from category 2 with clinical evidence of deterioration (e.g., increased ICP, Fio2 >50%, increasing inotrope requirements) in the absence of clinical sepsis
5 Seronegative hepatitis, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, or an idiosyncratic drug reaction with PT >100 sec or INR >6.5 and any grade of encephalopathy
6 Seronegative hepatitis, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, or an idiosyncratic drug reaction; any grade of encephalopathy; and any three from the following: unfavorable etiology (idiosyncratic drug reaction, seronegative hepatitis), age >40 years, jaundice to encephalopathy time >7 days, serum bilirubin >300 mmol/L, PT >50 sec or INR >3.5
7 Acute presentation of Wilson disease or Budd-Chiari syndrome, a combination of coagulopathy, and any grade of encephalopathy
8 Hepatic artery thrombosis on days 0 to 21 after liver transplantation
9 Early graft dysfunction on days 0 to 7 after liver transplantation with at least two of the following: AST >10,000 IU/L, INR >3.0, serum lactate >3 mmol/L, absence of bile production
10 Severe liver failure in any liver donor within 4 weeks of a donor operation

AST, aspartate aminotransferase; Fio2, inspired oxygen concentration; ICP, intracranial pressure; INR, international normalized ratio; PT, prothrombin time


Modified from Neuberger et al, 2008: Selection of patients for liver transplantation and allocation of donated livers in the UK. Gut 57(2):252-257.


Contraindications to transplantation in FHF include the onset of irreversible complications; thus the development of irreversible cerebral edema—characterized either by prolonged, documented elevations of intracranial pressure (ICP) or the presence of fixed dilated pupils for more than 6 hours—precludes transplantation. Active sepsis is also a contraindication.


One of the best guides to progression is given by serial estimation of the prothrombin time (Harrison et al, 1990) or factor V levels (Bernuau et al, 1986), because in the absence of extraneous blood products, these best represent the synthetic function of the liver. Initial improvement in the prothrombin time followed by deterioration suggests the presence of sepsis; therefore such patients should no longer be considered potential candidates. In addition, the patient remains at risk of developing complications related to raised ICP for up to 48 hours after successful transplantation (Dabos et al, 2004; Keays et al, 1991).


Because of the prognostic importance of clotting parameters, patients with FHF should not be given clotting factors until the decision for transplantation has been made; unless, of course, pressing clinical reasons are apparent. Once the decision for transplantation has been made, clotting should be normalized as much as possible within the constraints of volume replacement and avoidance of the complications of intracerebral edema. The ability to give large volumes of fluid may be limited by impaired renal function, but the presence of renal support will allow fluids to be taken off more rapidly.


Because many of the extrahepatic manifestations of FHF may be a consequence of the presence of large amounts of necrotic tissue, some centers have advocated the use of a two-stage procedure, whereby the failed liver is removed, and the patient remains anhepatic until a suitable graft can become available (Ringe et al, 1993). Although there is little doubt that following hepatectomy, the patient’s condition may well improve, few convincing data are available at present to suggest that this approach improves outcome; however, such a procedure may be indicated in a patient who is rapidly deteriorating for whom a graft has been found, but logistic conditions may enforce some delay before the graft can be successfully performed.


One of the dilemmas in considering liver transplantation in patients with acute liver failure is that if the liver does recover, a complete return to normal structure and function is likely. The use of auxiliary transplantations, such as auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplantation, or partial transplantations may allow the earlier use of liver grafting as a safety net; because if the patient’s liver does recover, the donor liver can be removed or allowed to atrophy, and the patient can return to a life of good liver function free of immunosuppression. The use of artificial liver support devices (Chapter 72) remains uncertain, but systems such as the molecular absorbent recirculation system (MARS; Gambro AB, Sweden) may offer a bridge to transplantation (Mitzner et al, 2002).


Patients who develop FHF as a consequence of paracetamol overdose pose a special problem. Those with a long history of psychiatric disease that has been unresponsive to full intervention and support and those with a history of recurrent overdose are not usually appropriate candidates. Many patients who are seen for acetaminophen overdose have taken the drug often on an impulse because of a relatively trivial problem. In such cases, it is appropriate to offer these patients transplantation. In contrast, if the overdose is taken as a consequence of long-term social or domestic problems, it is possible that even after successful grafting, the patient will return to identical problems with the additional burden of a liver transplantation and its consequences; in this setting, grafting may not be appropriate.



Metabolic Diseases


A number of metabolic diseases account for less than 5% of liver transplantations in adults, and these may be corrected by liver transplantation (Table 97A.2). In some cases, where the metabolic defect arises in the liver, transplantation will correct that defect. This is seen, for example, with Wilson disease or hemophilia. In other conditions, such as some types of hypercholesterolemia, the metabolic defect occurs within the liver, but the heart is the organ affected. Some centers have advocated the use of liver transplantation to prevent the onset of severe coronary artery disease, although when cardiac disease is already present, combined heart and liver transplantations may also be performed. Similar considerations apply to hyperoxaluria that requires liver and kidney replacement. In other conditions, such as hemophilia, with alternative therapies such as replacement with factor VIII, transplantation should only be considered if liver disease is extensive, such as may occur with HCV infection transmitted via blood products.


Table 97A.2 Inborn Errors of Metabolism that Have Been Treated by Liver Transplantation























Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

May 31, 2016 | Posted by in HEPATOPANCREATOBILIARY | Comments Off on Liver transplantation: Indications and general considerations

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access
Liver Affected Other Organs Also Affected
α1-Antitrypsin deficiency Primary hyperoxaluria
Wilson disease Crigler-Najjar syndrome
Protoporphyria Primary hypercholesterolemia
Tyrosinosis Niemann-Pick disease
Tyrosinemia Sea-blue histiocyte disease*
Galactosemia