Copyright
        ©The Author(s) 2015.
    
    
        World J Gastroenterol. Nov 14, 2015; 21(42): 12071-12082
Published online Nov 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i42.12071
Published online Nov 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i42.12071
            Table 1 Overview of the selection criteria for liver transplantation
        
    | Name | Criteria | Ref. | 
| Milan | 1 tumor < 5 cm in diameter or | Mazzaferro et al[7] | 
| ≤ 3 tumor nodules, each ≤ 3 cm in diameter | ||
| No extrahepatic manifestation | ||
| No vascular invasion | ||
| Up-to-seven criteria (“new Milan”) | Seven as the sum of the size of the largest tumor (in cm) and the number of tumors | Mazzaferro et al[166] | 
| Kyoto | ≤ 10 tumors, all ≤ 5 cm in diameter | Takada et al[167] | 
| PIVKA-II > 400 mAU/mL | ||
| UCSF | Solitary tumor ≤ 6.5 cm or | Yao et al[9] | 
| ≤ 3 nodules with largest lesion ≤ 4.5 cm and total tumor diameter ≤ 8 cm | ||
| No gross vascular invasion | ||
| Shanghai Fudan | Solitary tumor ≤ 9 cm in diameter or | Fan et al[168] | 
| ≤ 3 lesions with the largest ≤ 5 cm and total tumor diameter ≤ 9 cm | ||
| Hangzhou | Total tumor diameter ≤ 8 cm or | Zheng et al[169] | 
| Total tumor diameter more than 8 cm with histopathological grade I or II and preoperative α-fetoprotein ≤ 400 ng/mL | Lee et al[170] | |
| Asan | Largest tumor diameter ≤ 5 cm | |
| Hepatocellular carcinoma number ≤ 6 | ||
| No gross vascular invasion | 
            Table 2 Overview of prioritization systems in different transplant regions worldwide
        
    | Region | Country | Basic listing | Standard exception | Patient benefit | 
| Eurotransplant | Germany | 1 tumor > 2 and < 5 cm up to 3 tumors > 1 and < 3 cm | Initial listing with MELD 22; upgrading every 3 mo by 10% mortality risk | |
| The Netherlands | 1 tumor > 2 and < 5 cm up to 3 tumors > 1 and < 3 cm | Initial listing with MELD 20; upgrading every 3 mo by 10% mortality risk | ||
| However, “test of time”: patient must have been on the waiting list for 6 mo prior | ||||
| Austria | Possible (if Milan criteria are met); however, irrelevant with center-based allocation | No | ||
| Europe | United Kingdom | Single lesion < 5 cm | No prioritization on the waiting list | |
| Up to 5 lesions < 3 cm | ||||
| Single lesion between 5 and 7 cm without progression over 6 mo | ||||
| No extrahepatic tumor | ||||
| No macrovascular invasion AFP < 1000 U/L | ||||
| France | Complex French Liver Allocation Score under consideration of | |||
| Lab-MELD-Scores | ||||
| Tumor stage (T2 ranked higher than T1) | ||||
| Elapsed waiting time | ||||
| Distance between donor and Recipient hospital | ||||
| Switzerland | 1 tumor > 2 and < 5 cm | Lab-MELD + 1.5 points per month | ||
| up to 3 tumors > 1 and < 3 cm | ||||
| North America | United States | 1 tumor > 2 and < 5 cm | Initial listing with MELD 22; upgrading every 3 mo by 10% mortality risk | |
| up to 3 tumors > 1 and < 3 cm | ||||
| South America | Brazil | 1 tumor < 5 cm | Initial listing with 20 points, increase to 24 points after 3 mo and 29 points after 6 mo | |
| up to 3 tumors of less than 3 cm each | 
- Citation: Fahrner R, Dondorf F, Ardelt M, Dittmar Y, Settmacher U, Rauchfuß F. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma - factors influencing outcome and disease-free survival. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(42): 12071-12082
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i42/12071.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i42.12071

 
         
                         
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                         
                         
                        