Faculty Bibliography

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has caused shockwaves throughout the US healthcare system. Nowhere has coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) caused more infections than in New York, where there have been over 26 500 infections. Resources have been appropriately allocated toward combating this outbreak, but where does this leave patients with severe non-COVID-19 diseases? Herein we provide the views of a liver transplant surgeon and transplant hepatologist in New York.

Patients with cirrhosis often have concomitant coronary artery disease and require percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PCI in cirrhotics can be associated with significant risks due to thrombocytopenia, possible coagulopathies, bleeding, and renal failure. Longer term risks of PCI in cirrhotics have not been well studied. Our study seeks to evaluate the 90-day outcomes of PCI in patients with cirrhosis. Patients receiving PCI were identified from the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to 2014 and stratified by the presence of co-morbid cirrhosis. The total mortality during index admission and 90-day readmissions as well as the readmissions rate were examined. Adverse events including bleeding, stroke, kidney injury, and vascular complications were also compared. Patients with cirrhosis had a significantly higher number of co-morbidities. The cirrhosis group had a higher overall 90-day mortality (10.3% vs 2.5%, p < 0.01), including during the index hospitalization (7.0% vs 1.8%, p < 0.01), as well as a higher 90-day readmission rate (38.2% vs 20.2%, p < 0.01). Patients with cirrhosis also had higher frequencies of overall 90-day adverse events (44.7% vs 17.7%, p < 0.01), including gastrointestinal bleeding (15.3% vs 2.7%, p < 0.01) and acute kidney injury (28.4% vs 10.1%, p < 0.01). In conclusion, patients with cirrhosis face a significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes including mortality, readmissions, and adverse events in the 90 days after hospitalization for PCI compared with the general population.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network recently approved liver transplant (LT) prioritization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan Criteria (MC) who are down-staged (DS) with locoregional therapy (LRT). We evaluated post-LT outcomes, predictors of down-staging, and the impact of LRT in patients with beyond-MC HCC from the U.S. Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (20 centers, 2002-2013). APPROACH AND RESULTS:Clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and HCC recurrence (HCC-R) were compared between patients within MC (n = 3,570) and beyond MC (n = 789) who were down-staged (DS, n = 465), treated with LRT and not down-staged (LRT-NoDS, n = 242), or untreated (NoLRT-NoDS, n = 82). Five-year post-LT OS and RFS was higher in MC (71.3% and 68.2%) compared with DS (64.3% and 59.5%) and was lowest in NoDS (n = 324; 60.2% and 53.8%; overall P < 0.001). DS patients had superior RFS (60% vs. 54%, P = 0.043) and lower 5-year HCC-R (18% vs. 32%, P < 0.001) compared with NoDS, with further stratification by maximum radiologic tumor diameter (5-year HCC-R of 15.5% in DS/<5 cm and 39.1% in NoDS/>5 cm, P < 0.001). Multivariate predictors of down-staging included alpha-fetoprotein response to LRT, pathologic tumor number and size, and wait time >12 months. LRT-NoDS had greater HCC-R compared with NoLRT-NoDS (34.1% vs. 26.1%, P < 0.001), even after controlling for clinicopathologic variables (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.33, P < 0.001) and inverse probability of treatment-weighted propensity matching (HR = 1.82, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In LT recipients with HCC presenting beyond MC, successful down-staging is predicted by wait time, alpha-fetoprotein response to LRT, and tumor burden and results in excellent post-LT outcomes, justifying expansion of LT criteria. In LRT-NoDS patients, higher HCC-R compared with NoLRT-NoDS cannot be explained by clinicopathologic differences, suggesting a potentially aggravating role of LRT in patients with poor tumor biology that warrants further investigation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Ex vivo surgery may provide a chance at R0 resection for conventionally unresectable tumors. However, long-term outcomes have not been well documented. In this study, we analyze our 11-year outcomes to define its role. STUDY DESIGN:We retrospectively analyzed 46 consecutive patients who underwent ex vivo surgery at our institution 2008-2019. RESULTS:The types of tumors were: carcinoma (n = 20), sarcoma (n = 20) and benign to low grade tumor (n = 6). The type of ex vivo surgery was chosen based on tumor location and vascular involvement. The most commonly performed procedure was ex vivo hepatectomy (n = 18), followed by ex vivo resection and intestinal autotransplantation (n = 12), ex vivo Whipple procedure and liver autotransplantation (n = 8) and multivisceral ex vivo procedure (n = 7). Twenty-three patients (50%) are currently alive with median follow-up of 4.0-years (11 months-11.8 years). The overall survival was 70%/59%/52%, at 1-/3-/5-years, respectively. Patient survival for benign to low grade tumors, sarcoma, and carcinoma was 100%/100%/100%, 65%/60%/50%, and 65%/45%/40%, at 1-/3-/5-years, respectively. Ninety-one percent patients had R0 resection, and 57% had no recurrence to date with median follow-up of 3.1-years. Two patients (4.3%) died within 30 days due to sepsis and gastroduodenal artety (GDA) stump blowout. Two additional patients died between 30 and 90 days due to sepsis. Perioperative mortality in the last 23 consecutive cases was limited to 1 patient who died of sepsis between 30 and 90 days. CONCLUSIONS:For a selected group of patients with conventionally unresectable tumors, ex vivo surgery can offer effective surgical removal with a reasonably low perioperative mortality at experienced centers.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of the study was to determine the rate, predictors, and impact of complete pathologic response (cPR) to pretransplant locoregional therapy (LRT) in a large, multicenter cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). BACKGROUND:LRT is used to mitigate waitlist dropout for patients with HCC awaiting LT. Degree of tumor necrosis found on explant has been associated with recurrence and overall survival, but has not been evaluated in a large, multicenter study. METHODS:Comparisons were made among patients receiving pre-LT LRT with (n = 802) and without (n = 2637) cPR from the United States Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (UMHTC), and multivariable predictors of cPR were identified using logistic regression. RESULTS:Of 3439 patients, 802 (23%) had cPR on explant. Compared with patients without cPR, cPR patients were younger; had lower Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, AFP levels, and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratios (NLR); were more likely to have tumors within Milan criteria and fewer LRT treatments; and had significantly lower 1-, 3-, and 5-year incidence of post-LT recurrence (1.3%, 3.5%, and 5.2% vs 6.2%, 13.5%, and 16.4%; P < 0.001) and superior overall survival (92%, 84%, and 75% vs 90%, 78%, and 68%; P < 0.001). Multivariable predictors of cPR included age, sex, liver disease diagnosis, MELD, AFP, NLR, radiographic Milan status, and number of LRT treatments (C-statistic 0.67). CONCLUSIONS:For LT recipients with HCC receiving pretransplant LRT, achieving cPR portends significantly lower posttransplant recurrence and superior survival. Factors predicting cPR are identified, which may help prioritize patients and guide LRT strategies to optimize posttransplant cancer outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess improvements in long-term survival after liver transplant by analyzing outcomes in transplant recipients who survived beyond 1 year. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:Gains in short-term survival following liver transplantation have been gratifying. One-year survival in 1986 was 66% improved to over 92% in 2015. However, little is known about why long-term has not seen similar success. METHODS:We analyzed 111,568 recipients from 1987 to 2016 using the Kaplan-Meier method for time-to-event analysis and multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS:There were no significant gains in unadjusted long-term outcomes among 1-year survivors over the past 30 years. Only the time periods of 1987 to 1990 [hazard ratio (HR) 1.35, confidence interval CI) 1.28-1.42] and 1991 to 1995 (HR 1.17, CI 1.13-1.21) had a minor increase in risk compared with the period 2011 to 2016. Cause of death analysis suggests malignancy after transplantation is a growing problem and preventing recurrent hepatitis C with direct-acting antivirals (DDAs) may only have a limited impact. Furthermore, rejection leading to graft failure and death had a rare occurrence (1.7% of long-term deaths) especially when compared with the sequelae of long-term immunosuppression: malignancy (16.4%), nonrejection graft failure (9.8%), and infection (10.5%) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:In stark contrast to short-term survival, there have been no appreciable improvements in long-term survival following liver transplantation among 1-year survivors. Long-term sequelae of immunosuppression, including malignancy and infection, are the most common causes of death. This study highlights the need for better long-term immunosuppression management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:The aim of this review is to discuss existing data on liver transplantation for colorectal liver metastasis, emerging controversies, and future directions. RECENT FINDINGS:Contemporary experience with transplanting patients with liver metastasis from colon cancer is mainly derived from European centers, with a large proportion being from a single institution (SECA study), made possible in part by a relatively high donor pool. The initial results prove to be encouraging by demonstrating an overall survival advantage over unresectable patients with liver-limited disease managed with chemotherapy only. Recurrence patterns, however, suggest a need for better patient selection and treatment sequencing optimization. In North America, the main barriers in establishing similar protocols result from national liver graft shortage, which represents an issue of competing resources when indications have yet to be well defined. Evolving strategies in transplantation, such as the utilization of marginal liver grafts and living donor liver transplantation might constitute potential solutions. SUMMARY:Evidence suggests a potential survival benefit of liver transplantation for a subset of patients with unresectable liver-limited CRLM. Further prospective trials are needed to clarify the role and feasibility of this treatment strategy in oncotransplantation.