TY - JOUR
T1 - Modern Outcomes After Liver Retransplantation
T2 - A Single-center Experience
AU - Connor, Ashton A.
AU - Saharia, Ashish
AU - Mobley, Constance M.
AU - Hobeika, Mark J.
AU - Victor, David W.
AU - Kodali, Sudha
AU - Brombosz, Elizabeth W.
AU - Graviss, Edward A.
AU - Nguyen, Duc T.
AU - Moore, Linda W.
AU - Gaber, A. Osama
AU - Ghobrial, R. Mark
N1 - Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/7/1
Y1 - 2023/7/1
N2 - Background. The need for liver retransplantation (reLT) has increased proportionally with greater numbers of liver transplants (LTs) performed, use of marginal donors, degree of recipient preoperative liver dysfunction, and longer survival after LT. However, outcomes following reLT have been historically regarded as poor. Methods. To evaluate reLT in modern recipients, we retrospectively examined our single-center experience. Analysis included 1268 patients undergoing single LT and 68 patients undergoing reLT from January 2008 to December 2021. Results. Pre-LT mechanical ventilation, body mass index at LT, donor-recipient ABO incompatibility, early acute rejection, and length of hospitalization were associated with increased risk of needing reLT following index transplant. Overall and graft survival outcomes in the reLT cohort were equivalent to those after single LT. Mortality after reLT was associated with Kidney Donor Profile Index, national organ sharing at reLT, and LT donor death by anoxia and blood urea nitrogen levels. Survival after reLT was independent of the interval between initial LT and reLT, intraoperative packed red blood cell use, cold ischemia time, and preoperative mechanical ventilation, all previously linked to worse outcomes. Conclusions. These data suggest that reLT is currently a safer option for patients with liver graft failure, with comparable outcomes to primary LT.
AB - Background. The need for liver retransplantation (reLT) has increased proportionally with greater numbers of liver transplants (LTs) performed, use of marginal donors, degree of recipient preoperative liver dysfunction, and longer survival after LT. However, outcomes following reLT have been historically regarded as poor. Methods. To evaluate reLT in modern recipients, we retrospectively examined our single-center experience. Analysis included 1268 patients undergoing single LT and 68 patients undergoing reLT from January 2008 to December 2021. Results. Pre-LT mechanical ventilation, body mass index at LT, donor-recipient ABO incompatibility, early acute rejection, and length of hospitalization were associated with increased risk of needing reLT following index transplant. Overall and graft survival outcomes in the reLT cohort were equivalent to those after single LT. Mortality after reLT was associated with Kidney Donor Profile Index, national organ sharing at reLT, and LT donor death by anoxia and blood urea nitrogen levels. Survival after reLT was independent of the interval between initial LT and reLT, intraoperative packed red blood cell use, cold ischemia time, and preoperative mechanical ventilation, all previously linked to worse outcomes. Conclusions. These data suggest that reLT is currently a safer option for patients with liver graft failure, with comparable outcomes to primary LT.
KW - Humans
KW - Reoperation/adverse effects
KW - Retrospective Studies
KW - Risk Factors
KW - Liver Transplantation/adverse effects
KW - Liver Diseases
KW - Graft Survival
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85163524669&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85163524669&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/TP.0000000000004500
DO - 10.1097/TP.0000000000004500
M3 - Article
C2 - 36706077
AN - SCOPUS:85163524669
SN - 0041-1337
VL - 107
SP - 1513
EP - 1523
JO - Transplantation
JF - Transplantation
IS - 7
ER -