End-stage liver disease (ESLD), stemming from a spectrum of chronic liver pathologies including chronic liver failure, acute cirrhosis decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma, imposes a significant global healthcare burden. Liver transplantation (LT) remains the only treatment for ESLD. However, the escalating mortality on transplant waitlists has prompted the utilization of marginal liver grafts in LT procedures. These grafts primarily encompass elderly livers, steatotic livers, livers from donation after circulatory death, split livers and those infected with the hepatitis virus. While the expansion of the donor pool offers promise, it also introduces concomitant risks. These encompass graft failure, biliary and cardiovascular complications, the recurrence of liver disease and reduced patient and graft survival. Consequently, various established strategies, ranging from improved donor-recipient matching to surgical interventions, have emerged to mitigate these risks. This article undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the current landscape, evaluating the viability of diverse marginal liver grafts. Additionally, it synthesizes approaches aimed at enhancing the quality of such marginal liver grafts. The overarching objective is to augment the donor pool and ameliorate the risk factors associated with the shortage of liver grafts.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) provides an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with end-stage liver disease in the circumstance of scarcity of deceased grafts. However, the outcomes of LDLT remain controversial.

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of LDLT with DDLT. Twelve outcomes were assessed.

Thirty-nine studies involving 38563 patients were included. LDLT was comparable in red blood cell transfusion, perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, retransplantation rate, hepatitis C virus recurrence rate, and hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence rate with DDLT. Cold ischemia time was shorter and duration of recipient operation was longer in LDLT. Postoperative intra-abdominal bleeding rate occurred less frequently in LDLT recipients (odds ratio (OR) = 0.64, 95%confidence interval (CI) = 0.46 - 0.88, P = 0.006), but this did not decrease the perioperative mortality. LDLT was associated with significantly higher biliary (OR = 2.23, 95%CI = 1.59 - 3.13, P < 0.00001) and vascular (OR = 2.00, 95%CI = 1.31 - 3.07, P = 0.001) complication rates and better overall survival (OS) (1 year: OR = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.01 - 1.72, P = 0.04; 3 years: OR = 1.39, 95%CI = 1.14 - 1.69, P = 0.0010; and 5 years: OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.04 - 1.70, P = 0.02). According to subgroup analysis, biliary complication rate and OS improved dramatically as experience increased, while vascular complication rate could not be improved because it was mainly caused by the difference of the donor type itself.

LDLT remains a valuable option for patients in need of liver transplantation for it provides an excellent alternative to DDLT without compromising recipient outcomes. Further refinement in biliary and vascular reconstruction techniques and the accumulation of liver transplantation centers' experience are the key factors in expanding the application of LDLT.

Donor factors influence hepatitis C virus (HCV) disease severity in liver transplant (LT) recipients. Living donors, because they are typically young and have short cold ischemic times, may be advantageous for HCV-infected patients. Among HCV-infected patients in the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) surviving >90 days and followed for a median 4.7 years, advanced fibrosis (Ishak stage ≥3) and graft loss were determined. The 5-year cumulative risk of advanced fibrosis was 44% and 37% in living donor LT (LDLT) and deceased donor LT (DDLT) patients (P = 0.16), respectively. Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) activity at LT (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.38 for doubling of AST, P = 0.005) and biliary strictures (HR = 2.68, P = 0.0001) were associated with advanced fibrosis, but LDLT was not (HR = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.69, P = 0.63). The 5-year unadjusted patient and graft survival probabilities were 79% and 78% in LDLT, and 77% and 75% in DDLT (P = 0.43 and 0.32), with 27% and 20% of LDLT and DDLT graft losses due to HCV (P = 0.45). Biliary strictures (HR = 2.25, P = 0.0006), creatinine at LT (HR = 1.74 for doubling of creatinine, P = 0.0004), and AST at LT (HR = 1.36 for doubling of AST, P = 0.004) were associated with graft loss, but LDLT was not (HR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.49-1.18, P = 0.23).

Donor type does not affect the probability of advanced fibrosis or patient and graft survival in HCV-infected recipients. Thus, while LDLT offers the advantage of shorter wait times, there is no apparent benefit for HCV disease progression. Biliary strictures have a negative effect on HCV fibrosis severity and graft survival, and a high AST at LT may be an important predictor of fibrosis risk post-LT.

Many controversies exist on the different outcomes of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recipients.

We aimed to determine the difference in outcomes between HCC patients who underwent LDLT or DDLT after successful downstaging therapy.

Eighty-three adult patients were diagnosed with advanced HCC and received a liver transplantation after various successful downstaging therapies: 31 patients underwent LDLT and 52 patients underwent DDLT. We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data of these two groups.

The LDLT and DDLT groups showed similar overall complication rates and mortality rates. The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year recurrence-free rates were 77.4, 71, and 62.7% after LDLT and 80.7, 69.2, and 60.5% after DDLT (P=0.771). The overall patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 90.3, 74.2, and 71% after LDLT and 90.4, 71.2, and 67.3% after DDLT (P=0.860). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplant hepatitis B virus recurrence rates were 4, 5, and 10.5%, respectively, for the patients who underwent LDLT and 2.6, 6.7, and 10.7%, respectively, for the patients who underwent DDLT (P=0.918).

These data strongly suggest that no significant differences in postoperative complications, tumor recurrence rate, survival rate, and hepatitis B virus recurrence exist between DDLT and LDLT patients.

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompression. In areas with low deceased-donor organ availability like Japan, living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is similarly indicated for HCV cirrhosis as deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in Western countries and accepted as an established treatment for HCV-cirrhosis, and the results are equivalent to those of DDLT. To prevent graft failure due to recurrent hepatitis C, antiviral treatment with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. In contrast to DDLT, many Japanese LDLT centers have reported modified treatment regimens as best efforts to secure first graft, such as aggressive preemptive antiviral treatment, escalation of dosages, and elongation of treatment duration.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) provides a timely alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with hepatitis C virus-related (HCV-related) diseases in the circumstances of severe organ dearth. However, the patient and graft outcomes, and recurrence of HCV after LDLT remain controversial. Here we sought to compare the post-transplant outcomes after LDLT and DDLT.

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database were searched for eligible literatures. The major end points were patient survival, graft survival, recurrence rate, and acute rejection. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated using random-effects model to synthesize the results. Heterogeneity and publication bias were quantitatively evaluated.

Fourteen studies with a total of 2024 participants were included in this analysis. We found comparable patient survival between groups (1-year: OR, 0.78, 95% CI, 0.48-1.26, p=0.31; 2-year: OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.41-1.23, p=0.23; 3-year: OR, 0.79, 95% CI, 0.5-1.12, p=0.18; 4-year: OR, 0.92, 95% CI, 0.43-1.95, p=0.83; 5-year: OR, 1.06, 95% CI, 0.53-2.14, p=0.86, respectively). Although 1- and 3-year graft survivals were inferior in LDLT, 2-, 4- and 5-year graft survivals were similar. HCV recurrence rates and acute rejection rates were equivalent.

LDLT was equivalent to DDLT in terms of patient survival, long-term graft survival, HCV recurrence, and acute rejection rates, with potentially lower short-term patient and graft survival.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a well-established strategy to decrease the mortality in the waiting list and recent studies have demonstrated its value even in patients with low MELD score. However, LDLT is still under a high level of scrutiny because of its technical complexity and ethical challenges as demonstrated by a decline in the number of procedures performed in the last decade in Western Countries. Many aspects make LDLT different from deceased donor liver transplantation, including timing of transplantation, procedure-related complications as well as immunological factors that may affect graft outcomes. Our review suggests that in selected cases, LDLT offers significant advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation and should be used more liberally.

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompensation. The use of poor quality organs, particularly from older donors, has a highly negative impact on the severity of recurrence and patient/graft survival. Although immunosuppressive regimens have a considerable impact on the outcome, the optimal regimen after liver transplantation for HCV-infected patients remains unclear. Disease progression monitoring with protocol biopsy and new noninvasive methods is essential for predicting patient/graft outcome and starting antiviral treatment with the appropriate timing. Antiviral treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. Living-donor liver transplantation is now widely accepted as an established treatment for HCV cirrhosis and the results are equivalent to those of deceased donor liver transplantation.

Data on longterm outcomes after liver transplantation with partial grafts are limited. We compared 10-year outcomes for liver transplant patients who received whole grafts (WLT), split grafts from deceased donors (SLT), and partial grafts from living donors (LDLT).

We conducted a single-center analysis of 2,988 liver transplantations performed between August 1993 and May 2006 with median followup of 5 years. Graft types included 2,717 whole-liver, 181 split-liver, and 90 living-donor partial livers. Split-liver grafts included 109 left lateral and 72 extended right partial livers. Living-donor grafts included 49 left lateral and 41 right partial livers.

The 10-year patient survivals for WLT, SLT, and LDLT were 72%, 69%, and 83%, respectively (p=0.11), and those for graft survival were 62%, 55%, and 65%, respectively (p=0.088). There were differences in outcomes between adults and children when compared separately by graft types. In adults, 10-year patient survival was significantly lower for split extended right liver graft compared with adult whole liver and living-donor right liver graft (57% versus 72% versus 75%, respectively, p=0.03). Graft survival for adults was similar for all graft types. Retransplantation, recipient age older than 60 years, donor age older than 45 years, split extended right liver graft, and cold ischemia time>10 hours were predictors of diminished patient survival outcomes. In children, the 10-year patient and graft survivals were similar for all graft types.

Longterm graft survival rates in both adults and children for segmental grafts from deceased and living donors are comparable with those in whole organ liver transplantation. In adults, patient survival was lower for split compared with whole grafts when used in retransplantations and in critically ill recipients. Split graft-to-recipient matching is crucial for optimal organ allocation and best use of a scarce and precious resource.

Hepatitis C recurs universally after liver transplantation (LT). Whether its progression differs after live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is still debated. We retrospectively analyzed 201 consecutive LTs performed at our institution for hepatitis C-related end-stage liver disease between April 2000 and December 2005 (46 LDLTs and 155 DDLTs). Patients were followed with protocol biopsies for medians of 29 (LDLT) and 39 months (DDLT; P = 0.7). Although overall graft and patient survival did not differ, the mean fibrosis stage (Metavir) was significantly higher at 12 to 48 months post-LT (all P < 0.05), and the rate of fibrosis progression tended to be faster after DDLT than LDLT (0.19 versus 0.11 stage/year, P = 0.05). In univariate analysis, donor age, cold ischemic time, and DDLT were significantly associated with a fibrosis stage > or = 1 at 1 year and a fibrosis stage of 3 or 4 at 2 years post-LT. In multivariate analysis, however, donor age was the sole variable independently associated with both surrogate outcomes. Thus, donor age > 45 years carried a relative risk of 8.17 (confidence interval = 2.6-25.5, P = 0.001) for reaching fibrosis stage 3 or 4 at 2 years post-LT. In conclusion, donor age, rather than the transplant approach, determines the progression of recurrent hepatitis C after LT. LDLT, allowing for the selection of younger donors, may particularly benefit hepatitis C patients.

Controversy exists as to whether there is an increased severity or frequency of recurrent hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection in recipients of adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) grafts. We sought to examine the time to histological recurrence and survival in HCV (+) patients who underwent split liver transplantation (SLT), which is technically similar to what occurs in the LDLT procedure.

Twenty four HCV (+) adult recipients were identified through the UNOS database as having had SLT procedures at three centers: Mount Sinai Medical Center, University of Chicago, and University of California at Los Angeles. Of these, 17 patients with comprehensive data were matched to 32 HCV (+) patients who underwent whole deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) during the same time period. Outcome and time to initial HCV recurrence as documented by liver biopsy were assessed. Liver biopsy was performed when clinically indicated.

Patients who had SLT were significantly older (P=.01). There was no difference in number of rejection episodes (P=.40). Fifteen of 17 SLT (88%) versus 24/32 DDLT (75%) patients had documented HCV recurrence by biopsy (P=.46). The time to median cumulative incidence of recurrence of HCV post-liver transplantation was 12.6 months (SLT) versus 39.8 months (DDLT) patients. There was no difference in survival between SLT and DDLT patients (47 vs 70 months, P=.62) nor in cumulative incidence of histological HCV recurrence at 1, 2, and 3 years (P=.198, .919, and .806, respectively).

There is no difference in the cumulative incidence of histological recurrence of HCV post-liver transplant or in survival between recipients of deceased donor and split liver transplants.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated cirrhosis is an increasingly frequent indication for liver transplantation (LT). However, HCV recurrence is universal and this immediately occurs following LT, which endangers both the graft and patient survival. We investigated the frequency of posttransplant recurrence of HCV infection and the patient-graft survival, and we analyzed the responses to ribavirin and interferon therapy in the patients with recurrent HCV infection after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 39 HCV-associated cirrhosis patients who underwent LDLT at Asan Medical Center between August 1992 and June 2006. In this study, the diagnosis of recurrent HCV was made on the basis of increased transaminases and serum HCV RNA levels greater than 10 million IU/mL because protocol liver biopsy was not performed.

HCV recurrence was seen in 26 of the 39 LDLT patients (66.7%). 86.7% of recurrence occurred within the first postoperative year. Antiviral treatment was used for all patients with recurrence of HCV. None of the 10 patients receiving ribavirin alone and 9 of 16 patients who received combination therapy with pegylated interferon alpha-2a plus ribavirin became HCV RNA negative and they remained persistently negative during the median follow-up of 24.9 months. Our data indicates that there is no significant factor influencing HCV recurrence except for the recipient's age. The 2-year patient survival for the HCV patients with HCC and those patients without HCC were 81.2% and 81.3%, respectively (P=0.85) and the 2-year graft survival rates were 81.2% and 68.2%, respectively (P=0.29). No patient died from HCV recurrence during the follow-up period.

Combination therapy with ribavirin and interferon appears to improve the outcome of recurrent HCV infected patients after LDLT.

Differentiating between acute cellular rejection (ACR) and recurrent hepatitis C virus after liver transplantation in hepatitis C virus-positive patients is difficult, but vital for preventing graft loss.

The blood eosinophil counts 3 days before or on the day of biopsy were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate their value for predicting ACR in 91 biopsy samples from 45 patients.

Eosinophil counts on the day of biopsy were significantly higher in the ACR group (n = 20) than in the non-ACR (n = 71) group, although the difference was negligible 3 days before the biopsy. A relative eosinophil count of 2% or an absolute eosinophil count of 200 cells/mm(3) predicted ACR with a specificity of 94% or 96%, respectively.

Blood eosinophil count on the day of biopsy can be helpful in the diagnosis of ACR in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis.

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has been associated with progression to cirrhosis in approximately 20% of patients, 5 years postoperatively. Accelerated decompensation has also been noted when compared with cirrhosis in non-transplant patients. Different treatment strategies are available for recurrent HCV infection post-OLT, but efforts are hindered by the modest response rates, poor tolerability and the risk of rejection as well as graft loss. Anti-HCV immunoglobulin therapy to prevent graft infection with HCV has no established role at present but studies are ongoing. Treatment prior to transplantation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has been evaluated but the results are too preliminary to make firm recommendations. Prophylactic interferon-based antiviral therapy in the early postoperative period to prevent graft infection was shown to have low response rates and high rates of adverse effects. Treatment of established recurrent HCV infection with combination peginterferon (pegylated interferon) and ribavirin is associated with 10-59% sustained virological response and the predictive value of a positive early virological response has been validated in the post-transplant setting. Improvement in inflammatory activity after viral eradication is well established, but fibrosis regression or stabilisation is less predictable and factors such as rejection and biliary complications may still contribute to graft loss. Most studies have initiated therapy at least 6 months postoperatively in order to optimise patient tolerance and enable the addition of ribavirin. The use of adjuvant agents to treat drug-induced neutropenia and anaemia in this population is evolving and becoming a crucial part of therapy. Determination of optimal doses of both pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and guidance on when to stop treatment, as well as improving tolerability are important steps in achieving higher response rates and minimising drug toxicity.

One of the most important factors in the increasing number of liver transplantations performed in the United States is the growing acceptance of marginal grafts, which are defined as organs at increased risk for poor function or failure that may subject the recipient to greater risks of morbidity or mortality. Based on encouraging results, a growing number of liver transplantation centers are broadening their criteria for transplantation of marginal grafts. This article discusses the use of the extended criteria donor liver, split-liver, and living-donor liver transplantation.

Today, hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause for liver transplantation (LT) and viral recurrence is almost universal. It has been suggested that viral replication within the transplanted tissue might be increased in organs of reduced size such as LD grafts. In the current literature the data is controversial, with many studies lacking routine liver biopsies. We performed a retrospective analysis of 289 HCV-LT (20 LD splits) patients receiving transplants between 1997 and 2005. Patient and organ survival, intensity of HCV recurrence, and fibrosis progression were analyzed with respect to deceased donor (DD) LT (DDLT) or living donor (LD) LT (LDLT). Organ and patient survival was significantly better for full-size recipients than for split-liver patients, with P = 0.037 for organ survival and P = 0.037 for patient survival; yet there were no significant differences when split-liver patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond the Milan criteria (n = 3) were excluded from the analysis (P > 0.05). First year fibrosis progression was 1.29 in full-size grafts and 1.07 in split-livers (P = not significant). In conclusion, in our patient sample, intensity of HCV recurrence was not increased in LD graft recipients compared to full-size recipients. Patient and organ survival were similar when patients with large HCC and early tumor recurrence were excluded from analysis. LDLT can therefore be advocated for HCV patients.

Approximately 400 liver transplants are performed in Canada every year and close to 6000 per year in the United States. Forty per cent to 45% of all liver transplants are performed for patients with underlying hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease. These patients have a different natural history, new complication risks and different treatment efficacy than nontransplant HCV patients. Every effort must be made to identify those patients at highest risk for progressive liver disease post-transplant. Recurrent HCV is an Achilles' heel to transplant hepatology. The true natural history of this disease is only starting to unravel and many questions remain unanswered on the optimal management of these patients after liver transplantation. The present report summarizes the literature and ongoing research needs that are specific to HCV-related liver transplantation.

Donor right hepatectomy for adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is a major surgical operation for the benefit of the recipient. Justification of procedure mandates knowledge of the possible physical and psychological negative effects on the donor. We prospectively and longitudinally quantified donor quality of life using generic and condition-specific questionnaires up to 1 year. The generic questionnaires were the Karnofsky Performance Status scale and the Chinese (Hong Kong) version of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Survey, which measures 8 health concepts: 4 physical components and 4 mental components. Within 1 year, 30 consecutive donors were included. These 11 male and 19 female donors (36.7% and 63.3%, respectively) had a median age of 35 years (range, 21-56 years). There was no donor mortality or major complications. Donor quality-of-life worsening was most significant in the first 3 postoperative months, particularly among the physical components. The physical and mental components returned to the previous levels in 6 to 12 months' time, though the Karnofsky performance scores were slightly lower at 1 year (P = 0.011). Twenty-six (86.7%) donors declared that they would donate again if there were such a need and it were technically possible. It was noticed that older donors were more likely to express unwillingness to donate again. In conclusion, the temporary worsening of donor quality of life substantiates ALDLT as an acceptable treatment modality.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are known to have a more benign course in children than in adults. Although the natural history of HCV recurrence after liver transplantation has been well studied in adult patients, much less is known about HCV recurrence after liver transplantation in pediatric patients. Herein, we report a case of a pediatric patient with HCV presumably acquired through vertical transmission. She underwent liver transplantation at 14 yr of age. The first three yr after liver transplantation were uneventful. However, in the past 12 months she has been hospitalized twice after developing ascites, hematemesis and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)-documented esophageal varices. Post-transplant biopsy has demonstrated chronic inflammation complicated with active hepatitis C and stage 2-3 scarring. This case report demonstrates the need for further epidemiologic studies to study the natural history of the rate of HCV recurrence after liver transplantation in the pediatric population.

Steroid-free immunosuppressive regimens reduce corticosteroid-related side effects in liver transplant recipients although their efficacy is very variable. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a steroid-free regimen in a 6-month, open-label, multicenter, pilot study, which involved 102 liver transplant patients treated with daclizumab (2 mg/kg within 6 h following transplant and 1 mg/kg on day 7), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF, 1 g b.i.d) and tacrolimus (trough levels of 5-15 ng/ml in the first month and 5-10 ng/ml thereafter). One intra-operative dose of methylprednisolone was administered. At 6 months, the acute rejection rate was 9.8%, and patient and graft survival rates were 96% and 95%, respectively. Acute rejection rates were similar for hepatitis C-positive patients (8.6%) and hepatitis C-negative patients (10.4%). Infections occurred in 22% of patients; most cases were considered mild or moderate. Post-transplantation hypertension and diabetes mellitus developed in 37% and 14% of patients, respectively, during the study period, but were markedly less frequent (8% and 6%, respectively) at 6 months. Hypercholesterolemia was observed in only 2% of patients. In conclusion, the steroid-free immunosuppressive regimen of daclizumab, MMF, and tacrolimus effectively prevents acute rejection after liver transplantation without decreasing safety.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative therapeutic option for patients with end-stage hepatitis C virus (HCV) cirrhosis because of the cadaveric organ shortage. HCV infection is now a leading indication for LDLT among adults worldwide, and there is a worse prognosis with HCV recurrence. The antivirus strategy after transplantation, however, is currently under debate. Recent updates on the clinical and therapeutic aspects of living donor liver transplantation for HCV are discussed in the present review.

The question of possible earlier and more aggressive recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) remains unanswered. To address this issue we retrospectively reviewed virological, histological, and clinical data in 67 patients (52 DDLT and 15 LDLT) who underwent liver transplant for their HCV-related cirrhosis since April 2001. Our data indicate that there is no statistical difference between LDLT and DDLT groups in mean age, Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, model for end-stage liver disease score, and gender distribution. The mean follow-up was 749 +/- 371 days in LDLT and 692 +/- 347 days in DDLT. The predominant genotype in the LDLT and DDLT are genotype 1 (LDLT, 91%; DDLT, 70%). All patients with histologically confirmed recurrent HCV had detectable HCV-RNA in serum. The histological recurrence rate of hepatitis C was 58% at 4 months, 90% at 1 year, and 100% at 2 years in LDLT patients vs. 71% at 4 months, 94% at 1 year, and 95% at 2 years in DDLT patients (not significant) Comparison of the activity of inflammation and fibrosis score at all time points failed to show a statistical difference. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed similar patient and graft survival rates between the 2 groups. Our data indicate that histological recurrence of HCV is an early event and virtually universal 2 years' posttransplantation, regardless of modality of donor procurement.

Recurrent HCV infection is universal in liver transplant recipients who are viremic pretransplant. The rate of histologic disease progression after transplantation is more rapid, and the risk of cirrhosis by 5 to 10 years is about 30%. Several donor, recipient, and viral factors have been associated with worse post-transplant outcomes in recipients with recurrent hepatitis C. Whether or not HCV-infected recipients of live donor grafts have worse out-comes compared with deceased donor graft recipients is controversial. To maximize the long-term survival of recipients with HCV infection, eradication of infection is the ultimate goal. Treatment of recurrent HCV after liver transplantation can be undertaken at several different time points: (1) prophylactically, at the time of transplantation; (2) pre-emptively, in the early post-transplant period; and (3) after established recurrent histologic disease is present. Prophylactic therapy for HCV infection has no established role at present, but studies are ongoing. Preemptive therapy using IFN and RBV has resulted in variable SVR rates (9%-43%) and is generally poorly tolerated, especially if the patient has advanced liver disease pretransplantation. Treatment of established recurrent HCV disease with combination PEGIFN and RBV is associated with a SVR in about 30% to 35% of patients overall but is limited by high rates of dose reduction or drug discontinuation. In conclusion, successful HCV eradication in the post-transplant setting is difficult with current treatment options, but it is possible. Determination of the optimal doses of antiviral drugs in transplant patients and improvements in drug tolerability may be important first steps in achieving enhanced response rates. There is a need for new drugs in this population that have greater efficacy and a better safety profile.

Hepatitis C follows a variable course with some patients developing progressive liver fibrosis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, while others have minimal or no significant liver disease after decades of infection. Studies have identified both host and viral factors associated with disease progression. The importance of general factors such as age at infection, gender, immune status and alcohol consumption has long been recognized; however recently, polymorphisms in a wide array of genes have also been shown to be associated with progressive fibrosis. How specific viral proteins may contribute to disease progression has also been studied. This review highlights what is currently known about the factors associated with progressive liver injury in patients with hepatitis C. A greater understanding of the determinants of disease progression will hopefully lead to improved utilization of existing treatments and ultimately may aid in identification of new therapeutic targets.

Whether hepatitis C virus recurrence occurs earlier and with greater severity for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) than for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) has recently become a subject of debate.

We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes for a cohort of 91 HCV-positive patients who underwent LDLT at Kyoto University with a median follow-up period of 25 months.

Overall 5-year patient survival for HCV patients was similar to that for non-HCV patients (n=209) who underwent right-lobe LDLT at our institute (69% vs. 71%). Survival rate of patients without HCC (n=34) tended to be better than that of patients with HCC (n=57) (82% vs. 60%, P=0.069). According to annual liver biopsy, rate of fibrosis progression to stage 2 or more (representing significant fibrosis) was 39% at 2 years after LDLT. Univariate analysis showed that female recipient and male donor represented significant risk factors for significant fibrosis. Progression to severe recurrence (defined as the presence of liver cirrhosis (F4) in a liver biopsy and/or the development of clinical decompensation) was observed in five patients.

Postoperative patient survival was similar for HCV-positive and -negative recipients in our adult LDLT series. Rates of progression to severe disease due to HCV recurrence seemed comparable between our LDLT recipients and DDLT recipients described in the literature. Although longer-term follow-up is required, our results suggest that LDLT can produce acceptable outcomes also for patients suffering from HCV-related cirrhosis.

With the shortage of donor organs, increasing number of hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)-positive [HBcAb(+)] liver allografts are being used for liver transplantation (LTx) in patients who are HBcab-negative [HBsAb(-)]. This study was aimed at assessing outcomes for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive [HCV(+)] and HCV-negative [HCV(-)] patients who received HBcAb(+) liver grafts from deceased donors and also received a short course of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIg) with long-term lamivudine therapy after LTx.

From February 1995 through February 2003, 28 patients (mean age 53.8 +/- 10.2 years, 19 men and nine women, 16 HCV[-]; 12 HCV[+]) received HbcAb(+) liver allografts. All recipients received a short course of HBIg prophylaxis (10,000 units/day for 4 days) and long-term lamivudine 100 mg/d after LTx in addition to a tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen.

Seven (25%) of the 28 recipients died during follow-up and three recipients required retransplantation. Three recipients (10.7%) developed HBV infection during follow-up, one of whom died 36 months after LTx and the other two had YMDD mutant HBV. The overall 6-year actuarial patient survival after transplantation was 74.4% and those for HCV(-) and HCV(+) recipients were 81.3% and 66.6%, respectively (P = .46). The overall 6-year actuarial graft survival was 63.9% and those for HCV(+) and HCV(-) recipients were 68.8% and 57.1%, respectively (P = .6).

We conclude that HBcAb(+) liver grafts can be used for both HCV(+) patients and HCV(-) patients who are critically ill, have early hepatocellular carcinoma, or have been exposed to HBV in the past. A short course of HBIg-lamivudine combination therapy provides effective prophylaxis against HBV infection in 89% of recipients of HBcAb(+) grafts.

This study tested the hypothesis that hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA and core antigen levels rise more rapidly after liver transplantation (LT) in recipients of grafts from living donors (LD) versus deceased donors (DD). Eleven consecutive LD and 15 DD recipients were followed prospectively. Before LT, median HCV RNA levels were similar: 5.42 (LDLT) and 5.07 (DDLT) log(10) IU/mL (P = NS). During the first 7 hours after LT a trend toward a greater HCV RNA decrease in LDLT patients was seen, although they received fewer blood replacement products during surgery. HCV RNA levels rose more rapidly in LDLT patients between days 1 and 3 (P = .0059) and were higher in this group on days 2, 3, 4, and 5. Core antigen levels were significantly higher in LDLT patients on days 3 and 5, although they were similar before LT (P = NS). Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values were higher among LDLT patients from 8 to 14 days and from 4 to 24 months. Two-year graft and patient survival were 73% for LDLT patients and 80% for DDLT patients (P = NS). In conclusion, viral load rose more rapidly in LD recipients and reached higher levels shortly after surgery. Greater ALT elevations were evident in the LDLT group, but survival rates were similar. The trend toward a greater initial viral load decrease in patients with LD grafts and the significantly sharper increase suggest that the liver plays a predominant role in both HCV clearance and replication.

The increasing awareness of liver diseases and their early detection have led to an increase in the number of transplant waiting list candidates over the past decade. This need has not been matched by the actual number of orthotopic liver transplantations performed. Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an innovative surgical technique intended to expand the available organ donor pool. Although LDLT offers definite advantages to the recipient, it offers none to the donor except for the possibility of psychological well-being. Clinical research studies aimed at the prospective collection of data for donors and recipients need to be conducted.

Older donor allografts are being accepted for liver transplantation (LTx) due to shortage of organs. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection-related disease is presently the most common indication of LT in the United States. We studied the impact of donor age on patient and graft survivals in patients with HCV infection.

One hundred fifty four consecutive HCV(+) LTx recipients (117 men, 37 women) were studied. The mean follow-up period was 41.0 +/- 30.2 months. The population was divided into four groups according to donor age: group I (< or =20 years); group II (21 to 40 years); group III (41 to 60 years); group IV (>60 years).

Thirty-two (20.8%) patients died during follow-up and 16 patients (10.4%) required retransplantation. The actuarial 7-year patient survivals for groups I, II, III, and IV were 87.1%, 73.7%, 69.3%, and 68.5%, respectively (P = .4). Patient survivals for donor age groups III + IV (n = 95) and groups I + II (n = 59) were 68.9% and 77.2%, respectively (P = .19). The 7-year graft survivals for groups I, II, III, and IV were 82.7%, 71.8%, 65.8%, and 62.5%, respectively (P = .17). Graft survivals for groups III + IV and groups I + II were 58.4% and 76.2%, respectively (P = .03).

Patient and graft survivals for HCV-positive liver transplant recipients in this study decreased progressively as the donor age increased. Patient and graft survivals were best for group I recipients. There were significant differences in graft survivals when recipients were grouped with a cutoff donor age of 40 years.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States and Europe, and more than 20,000 patients worldwide have undergone transplantation for complications of chronic hepatitis C. In North America, HCV accounts for 15% to 50% of the liver transplants performed in United States transplant programs. To maximize the long-term survival of liver transplant recipients who have HCV infection, eradication of infection is the ultimate goal. Pretransplant antiviral therapy with the goal of achieving viral eradication before transplantation is a consideration in some patients, especially those who have mildly decompensated liver disease. This article focuses on the management of liver transplant recipients who have HCV infection at the time of transplantation. Prophylactic and preemptive therapies, as well as treatment of established recurrent disease, are the strategies reviewed.

Liver transplantation continues to change as we further define appropriate criteria for allocation and utilization of this scarce resource. The following review highlights new trends and ideas in this evolving field.

Although the model for end-stage renal disease (MELD) scoring system appears to fairly accurately predict mortality while waiting for transplant, the system may be less accurate in predicting outcomes following transplantation. MELD scores offer an additional advantage to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), bringing them to transplant sooner with overall better survivals. However, despite its advantages, the MELD scoring system does not resolve the disparity in the allocation of organs between various organ procurement organizations. Several variables appear to affect patients with hepatitis C undergoing liver transplantation. Selection of appropriate donors appears to be important when transplanting patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection as increasing donor age is associated with poorer outcomes. However, the controversy over whether a living donor liver transplant (LDLT) results in poorer outcomes in HCV infected patients remains. Post-transplant medical treatment of HCV may result in both a sustained virologic response and improved histology. With improved overall survival in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplant (OLT), increasing attention has been focused on the medical complications following transplant. Identifying specific contributing factors in the development of renal dysfunction and devising strategies to prevent its occurrence are critical to further improvements in outcome following OLT.

As the gap between patients and available organs remains, continued investigation into appropriate allocation and maximization of outcomes following liver transplant will continue.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health problem worldwide, involving more than a half million new cases yearly, with an age-adjusted incidence of 5.5 to 14.9 per 10(5) population. In some areas of Asia and the Middle East, HCC ranks as the first cause of death due to cancer. The incidence of HCC is increasing in Europe and the United States, and it is currently the leading cause of death among cirrhotic patients. It is estimated that by the year 2010, the number of patients with HCC awaiting liver transplant in the United States will outnumber the supply of cadaver organs.

Concern exists that partial liver transplants (either a living donor [LD] or deceased donor [DD] in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients may be associated with an increased risk for recurrence. From 1999 to 2003, at our institution, 51 HCV-positive recipients underwent liver transplants: 32 whole-liver (WL) transplants, 12 LD transplants and 7 DD split transplants. Donor characteristics differed in that WL donors were older, and LD livers had lower ischemic times. Recipient characteristics were similar except that mean MELD scores in LD recipients were lower (p < 0.05). With a mean follow-up of 28.3 months, 46 (90%) recipients are alive: three died from HCV recurrent liver disease and two from tumor recurrence. Based on 1-year protocol biopsies, the incidence of histologic recurrence in the three groups is as follows: WL, 81%; LD, 50% and DD split, 86% (p = 0.06 for LD versus WL). The mean grade of inflammation on the biopsy specimens was: WL, 1.31; LD, 0.33 and DD split, 1.2 (p = 0.002 for LD versus WL; p = 0.03 for LD versus DD split). Mean stage of fibrosis was: WL, 0.96; LD, 0.22 and DD split, 0.60 (p = 0.07 for LD versus WL). Liver regeneration does not seem to affect hepatitis C recurrence as much, perhaps, as factors such as DD status, donor age and cold ischemic time.

Liver and intestinal transplantation are currently the treatments of choice for life-threatening hepatic and gastrointestinal failure. These technologies have evolved through contributions from the fields of immunology, anatomy, physiology, surgery, anesthesiology, critical care, ethics, epidemiology, and public health. Transplantation now accounts for the treatment of over 5,000 recipients per year who are in a state of organ failure. The available donor population, however, is not increasing to meet the demands of the faster growing recipient population. This discrepancy has led to the rapid development of novel strategies that require critical evaluation to build on the success rates in recent years. This article presents the most salient advances in liver and intestinal transplantation in the last 15 years.

Preliminary reports suggested that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has a more aggressive course following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) compared to cadaveric liver transplantation (CLT). The aim of this prospective study was to establish if HCV disease recurrence differs between LDLT and CLT. A cohort of 116 consecutive HCV-infected patients undergoing 117 LTs in a single center from March 2000 to August 2003 were followed-up, including systematic liver biopsies. Severe recurrence (SR) was defined as biopsy-proven cirrhosis and/or the occurrence of clinical decompensation. After a median follow-up of 22 months (2.6-44 months), 26 (22%) patients developed SR (decompensation in 12), involving 17 (18%) of 95 patients undergoing CLT and 9 (41%) of 22 undergoing LDLT. The 2-year probability of presenting SR was significantly higher in LDLT compared to CLT (45% vs. 22%, P = .019). By univariate analysis LDLT (P = .019) and an ALT higher than 80 IU/L 3 months after LT (P = .022) were predictors of SR. In 93 patients from whom a liver biopsy was available 3 months after LT, a lobular necroinflammatory score >1 (P < .01), LDLT (P < .01), and biliary complications (P = .046) were associated with SR. However, the only variables independently associated with SR were LDLT (odds ratio [OR], = 2.8; 95% CI,1.19-6.6; P = .024) and a lobular necroinflammatory score > 1 (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8; P = .013). In conclusion, HCV recurrence is more severe in LDLT compared to CLT. Although our results were based on a single-center experience, they should be considered in the decision-making process of transplant programs, since severe HCV recurrence may ultimately compromise graft and patient survival.