Intraoperative intracardiac thrombosis in a liver transplant patient

A 66-year-old female with cryptogenic cirrhosis complicated by ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal bleeding and malnutrition with MELD of 34 underwent orthotopic deceased donor liver transplantation performed with piggyback technique. Extensive eversion thromboendovenectomy was performed for a portal vein thrombus which resulted in an excellent portal vein flow. The liver graft was recirculated without any hemodynamic instability. Subsequently, the patient became hypotensive progressing to asystole. She was resuscitated and a transesophageal probe was inserted which revealed a mobile right atrial thrombus and an underfilled poorly contractile right ventricle. The patient was noted to be coagulopathic at the time. She became progressively more stable with a TEE showing complete resolution of the intracardiac thrombus

Burden of excess mortality after implementation of the new kidney allocation system may be borne disproportionately by middle-aged recipients.

Under the new kidney allocation system (KAS), implemented in 2014, the distribution of the best quality donor kidney grafts shifted between age groups, but it is unclear whether this change translates to meaningful differences in post-transplant outcomes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 20,345 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients before and 4,605 recipients after implementation of the KAS using data from the United Network of Organ Sharing. Overall, two-year mortality was greater among recipients in the post-KAS era compared with the pre-KAS era (6.31% vs 5.91% respectively, [p = 0.01]), and two-year graft loss was not significantly different between eras (9.95% and 9.65%, respectively [p = 0.13]). In analysis stratified by age group (18-45, 46-55, 56-65, and ≥66 years), relative risk of mortality was 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.98) among recipients 46-55 years old and 1.47 (95% CI 1.18-1.81) among recipients 56-65 years old. Relative risk of all-cause graft loss was 1.43 (95% CI 1.20-1.70) among recipients 56-65 years old. There were no significant differences in relative risk of mortality or graft loss associated with the KAS era among other age groups. After adjustment for recipient characteristics and characteristics of the changing donor pool, relative risk of two-year mortality and graft loss associated with the post-KAS era was attenuated for recipients aged 46-55 and 56-65 years, but remained statistically significant. In this early analysis after implementation of the KAS, there is suggestion that increased risk of mortality and graft loss may be disproportionately borne by middle-aged recipients, which is only partially accounted for by changes in recipient and donor characteristics. These findings signal a need to continue to monitor the effects of the KAS to ensure that allocation practices both maximize utility of the kidney graft pool and respect fairness between age groups

Should donation after cardiac death liver grafts be used for retransplantation?

Introduction. Donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors provide an important source of livers that has been used to expand the donor pool. As a consequence of increased numbers of OLT, allograft failure due to early and late complications and disease recurrence are more commonly encountered. The only life saving treatment for patients with liver allograft failure is liver re-transplantation (LR). The use of DCD liver grafts for LR is controversial.Material and methods. Between February 1998 and June 2008, 10 patients underwent LR with DCD allografts. Five (50%) patients had no post operative complications. The 30 day, 1 year, and 3 year patient survival are 80, 60, and 60%, respectively. When DCD grafts are used for sick patients with high MELD scores for LR, the patient and graft survivals are prohibitively low.Conclusion. We do not recommend utilization of DCD liver grafts for LR if a candidate recipient has moderate to high MELD score

Contemporary patterns in kidney graft survival from donors after circulatory death in the United States.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplants from donors after circulatory death (DCD) make up an increasing proportion of all deceased donor kidney transplants in the United States (US). However, DCD grafts are considered to be of lower quality than kidneys from donors after brain death (DBD). It is unclear whether graft survival is different for these two types of donor kidneys. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of US deceased donor kidney recipients using data from the United Network of Organ Sharing from 12/4/2014 to 6/30/2018. We employed a Cox proportional hazard model with mixed effects to compare all-cause graft loss and death-censored graft loss for DCD versus DBD deceased donor kidney transplant recipients. We used transplant center as the random effects term to account for cluster-specific random effects. In the multivariable analysis, we adjusted for recipient characteristics, donor factors, and transplant logistics. RESULTS:Our cohort included 27,494 DBD and 7,770 DCD graft recipients transplanted from 2014 to 2018 who were followed over a median of 1.92 years (IQR 1.08-2.83). For DCD compared with DBD recipients, we did not find a significant difference in all-cause graft loss (hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.05 in univariable and HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.95-1.13] in multivariable analysis) or for death-censored graft loss (HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.91-1.06) in univariable and 1.05 (95% CI 0.99-1.11) in multivariable analysis). CONCLUSIONS:For a contemporary cohort of deceased donor kidney transplant recipients, we did not find a difference in the likelihood of graft loss for DCD compared with DBD grafts. These findings signal a need for additional investigation into whether DCD status independently contributes to other important outcomes for current kidney transplant recipients and indices of graft quality

Comprehensive and innovative techniques for liver transplantation in rats: A surgical guide

AIM: To investigate our learning curves of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in rats and the most important factor for successful surgery