Faculty Bibliography

The clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has evolved significantly over the past decade. Key advances include the introduction of immune-based treatment options, which now serve as the foundation for systemic therapies. Additionally, innovations in surgical techniques, such as robotic surgery, have broadened the scope of resection to include selected patients previously deemed unsuitable due to factors like tumor location or the presence of portal hypertension. HCC downstaging has also gained recognition as a viable strategy in appropriately selected patients, demonstrating outcomes comparable to those achieved under conventional listing criteria. Consequently, the management of HCC has become increasingly complex, underscoring the critical importance of multidisciplinary collaboration and shared decision-making. In this review, we provide a concise overview of practical recommendations for HCC management, encompassing aspects such as risk stratification, early detection, diagnosis, and treatment strategies.

Patients with cirrhosis who require surgeries are at higher risk of surgical complications and mortality than patients without cirrhosis. Several tools are available to predict the risk of mortality after surgery in patients with cirrhosis and should be used as a standard part of the preoperative evaluation. Improving surgical outcomes requires multidisciplinary care to ensure proper patient selection, to determine the appropriate timing of surgery, and to optimize the medical management of cirrhosis.

With the increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in both the United States and globally, the role of liver transplantation in management continues to be an area of active conversation as it is often considered the gold standard in the treatment of HCC. The use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and the indications in the setting of malignancy, both generally and in HCC specifically, are frequently debated. In terms of both overall survival and recurrence-free survival, LDLT is at least equivalent to DDLT, especially when performed for disease within Milan criteria. Emerging and compelling evidence suggests that LDLT is superior to DDLT in treating HCC as there is a significant decrease in waitlist mortality. As the oncologic indications for liver transplantation continue to expand and the gap between organ demand and organ availability continues to worsen, high volumes centers should consider using LDLT to shrink the ever-expanding waitlist.

The main aim of antiviral therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is to prevent disease progression and reduce the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In general, treatment is recommended for select patient groups viewed as being at higher risk of developing adverse outcomes from CHB. However, patients who do not meet treatment criteria under current international guidelines may still benefit from antiviral therapy to reduce CHB-related complications. Moreover, well-tolerated antiviral drugs that are highly effective at suppressing viral replication are now widely available, and withholding therapy from patients with viremia is increasingly controversial. In this article, we review traditional treatment paradigms and argue the merits of expanding treatment eligibility to patients with CHB who do not meet current treatment criteria.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The use of pediatric grafts for liver transplantation (LT) into adult recipients is rare, and reported outcomes are conflicting. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes in adult recipients following LT with grafts from deceased pediatric donors. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective study identifying adult LT between 2010 and 2020 using pediatric deceased donor liver grafts was conducted. Adults undergoing LT with deceased donor pediatric grafts (age ≤ 12) were identified and matched 1:2 with adults receiving adult grafts (age ≥ 18) based on recipient age (±10 y), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score at transplant (±5 points) and etiology of liver disease. To assess real liver size differences between the pediatric-donor and adult-donor groups, patients receiving a graft from a donor between 13 and 17 y were excluded from the main analysis and studied independently. Outcomes between the groups were compared. Complication rates were identified and graded using Clavien-Dindo classification. Graft and patient survival were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves. Results/UNASSIGNED: = 0.48). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Excellent patient and graft survival is achievable with LT using young pediatric deceased donor grafts in smaller adult recipients. Outcomes are comparable with recipients of age and MELD-matched adult donors. Careful donor MELD-score recipient matching and close monitoring for potential biliary and vascular complications are crucial to achieve acceptable outcomes.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Split liver transplantation (SLT) emerged due to its potential to contribute to the organ pool and reduce organ shortage. However, SLT is technically challenging and has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications leading to concerns about graft and patient survival. Moreover, there are few studies on matched-pair adult recipients of SLT and whole-liver transplant (WLT), with conflicting results. METHODS:This retrospective study analyze outcomes among adults who underwent SLT at our institution from 2010 to 2019. A 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed based on important donor and recipient variables. Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared between groups. Actuarial graft and patient survival were analyzed by KM curves. RESULTS:Out of 592 adults receiving a LT in our institution, 21 SLT adult recipients were identified and matched with 21 adults undergoing WLT. As expected donor age was significantly lower in SLT recipients (16 (15-22) vs. 32 (17-47), P = .012). Additional donor characteristics, including anthropometrics, and ischemic times were similar between groups. Baseline recipient characteristics and postoperative outcomes, including length of stay, vascular complications, biliary complications, and re-transplantation were comparable between SLT and WLT recipients. Graft (95/95/95 vs. 100/94/94, P = .98) and patient (100/100/100 vs. 100/94/94, P = .30) survival at 1-, 3-, 5-years, were similar between the SLT- and WLT group, respectively. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Split liver transplantation has the potential to increase the availability of organs for adult recipients without compromising individual outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are first-line agents for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Recent studies have challenged the assumption that these agents are equally effective at preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to determine whether the risk of HCC and mortality differ in patients with CHB treated with ETV and TDF. DESIGN:We performed a retrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs patients with CHB in the USA who initiated treatment with ETV or TDF between the dates of Food and Drug Administration approval of these medications and 1 January 2017. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine the association between antiviral therapy and HCC risk as well as the risk of death or liver transplantation. Propensity score adjustment and competing risks analysis were performed. RESULTS:We identified 2193 ETV-treated and 1094 TDF-treated patients who were followed for a mean of 5.4 years. We found no difference in the risk of HCC in ETV-treated versus TDF-treated patients (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.32). Results were similar in propensity score adjusted and competing risks analysis, and in multiple sensitivity analyses. We also found no difference in the risk of death or liver transplantation (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.39). CONCLUSIONS:We found no difference in the risk of HCC between patients with CHB treated with ETV versus TDF. Our results support current guideline recommendations that both agents are appropriate first-line options for the treatment of CHB.