Technique and outcome of domino liver transplantation from patients with maple syrup urine disease: Expanding the donor pool for live donor liver transplantation.
Adolescent
Adult
Child
Child, Preschool
End Stage Liver Disease
/ mortality
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Graft Rejection
/ etiology
Graft Survival
Humans
Liver Transplantation
/ adverse effects
Living Donors
/ supply & distribution
Male
Maple Syrup Urine Disease
/ physiopathology
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Survival Rate
Transplant Recipients
/ statistics & numerical data
Young Adult
live donor liver transplantation
maple syrup urine disease
metabolic liver disease
Journal
Clinical transplantation
ISSN: 1399-0012
Titre abrégé: Clin Transplant
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 8710240
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2019
11 2019
Historique:
received:
29
05
2019
revised:
22
08
2019
accepted:
31
08
2019
pubmed:
27
9
2019
medline:
24
9
2020
entrez:
27
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Domino liver transplantation (DLT) using liver allografts from patients with metabolic disorders enhances organ utilization. Short- and long-term course and outcome of these patients can impact the decision to offer this procedure to patients, especially those with diseases that can potentially be cured with liver transplant. We reviewed the outcomes of DLT from maple syrup urine disease (MSUD) patients in our large academic pediatric and adult transplant program. All patients receiving DLT were analyzed retrospectively with a minimum of one-year follow-up period for patient and donor characteristics, early and late postoperative complications and patient and graft survival with their MSUD donors in terms of age, weight, MELD/PELD scores, cold ischemia time, postoperative leucine levels, and peak ALT (alanine aminotransferase) levels during the first 48 postoperative hours. Between 2006 and May 2019, 21 patients underwent domino liver transplantation with live donor allografts from MSUD patients. Four patients transplanted for different metabolic diseases are focus of a separate report. Seventeen patients with minimum one-year follow-up period are reported herein. The indications were primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC, n = 4), congenital hepatic fibrosis (CHF, n = 2), alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (A-1 ATD, n = 2), progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis (PFIC, n = 2), cystic fibrosis (n = 1), primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC, n = 1), neonatal hepatitis (n = 1), embryonal sarcoma (n = 1), Caroli disease (n = 1), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, n = 1), and chronic rejection after liver transplantations for PSC (n = 1). All patients and grafts survived at median follow-up of 6.4 years (range 1.2-12.9 years). Median domino recipient age was 16.2 years (range 0.6-64.6 years) and median MSUD recipient age was 17.6 years (range 4.8-32.1 years). There were no vascular complications during the early postoperative period, one patient had portal vein thrombosis 3 years after DLT and a meso-Rex bypass was successfully performed. Small for size syndrome (SFSS) occurred in reduced left lobe DLT recipient and was managed successfully with conservative management. Biliary stricture developed in 2 patients and was resolved by stenting. Comparison between DLT and MSUD recipients' peak postoperative ALT results and PELD/MELD scores showed lower levels in DLT group (P-value <.05). Patient and graft survival in DLT from MSUD donors was excellent at short- and long-term follow-up. Metabolic functions have been normal in all recipients on a normal unrestricted protein diet. Ischemia preservation injury based on peak ALT was significantly decreased in DLT recipients. Domino transplantation from pediatric and adult recipients with selected metabolic diseases should be increasingly considered as an excellent option and alternative to deceased donor transplantation, thereby expanding the living donor pool. This, to date, is the largest world experience in DLT utilizing livers from patients with MSUD.
Sections du résumé
AIM/BACKGROUND
Domino liver transplantation (DLT) using liver allografts from patients with metabolic disorders enhances organ utilization. Short- and long-term course and outcome of these patients can impact the decision to offer this procedure to patients, especially those with diseases that can potentially be cured with liver transplant. We reviewed the outcomes of DLT from maple syrup urine disease (MSUD) patients in our large academic pediatric and adult transplant program.
METHODS
All patients receiving DLT were analyzed retrospectively with a minimum of one-year follow-up period for patient and donor characteristics, early and late postoperative complications and patient and graft survival with their MSUD donors in terms of age, weight, MELD/PELD scores, cold ischemia time, postoperative leucine levels, and peak ALT (alanine aminotransferase) levels during the first 48 postoperative hours.
RESULTS
Between 2006 and May 2019, 21 patients underwent domino liver transplantation with live donor allografts from MSUD patients. Four patients transplanted for different metabolic diseases are focus of a separate report. Seventeen patients with minimum one-year follow-up period are reported herein. The indications were primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC, n = 4), congenital hepatic fibrosis (CHF, n = 2), alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (A-1 ATD, n = 2), progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis (PFIC, n = 2), cystic fibrosis (n = 1), primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC, n = 1), neonatal hepatitis (n = 1), embryonal sarcoma (n = 1), Caroli disease (n = 1), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, n = 1), and chronic rejection after liver transplantations for PSC (n = 1). All patients and grafts survived at median follow-up of 6.4 years (range 1.2-12.9 years). Median domino recipient age was 16.2 years (range 0.6-64.6 years) and median MSUD recipient age was 17.6 years (range 4.8-32.1 years). There were no vascular complications during the early postoperative period, one patient had portal vein thrombosis 3 years after DLT and a meso-Rex bypass was successfully performed. Small for size syndrome (SFSS) occurred in reduced left lobe DLT recipient and was managed successfully with conservative management. Biliary stricture developed in 2 patients and was resolved by stenting. Comparison between DLT and MSUD recipients' peak postoperative ALT results and PELD/MELD scores showed lower levels in DLT group (P-value <.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Patient and graft survival in DLT from MSUD donors was excellent at short- and long-term follow-up. Metabolic functions have been normal in all recipients on a normal unrestricted protein diet. Ischemia preservation injury based on peak ALT was significantly decreased in DLT recipients. Domino transplantation from pediatric and adult recipients with selected metabolic diseases should be increasingly considered as an excellent option and alternative to deceased donor transplantation, thereby expanding the living donor pool. This, to date, is the largest world experience in DLT utilizing livers from patients with MSUD.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31556146
doi: 10.1111/ctr.13721
pmc: PMC8902482
mid: NIHMS1784559
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e13721Subventions
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : R01 DK109907
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
J Am Coll Surg. 1999 Dec;189(6):584-93
pubmed: 10589595
Dig Liver Dis. 2015 Apr;47(4):261-70
pubmed: 25498135
Transplant Proc. 2013 Mar;45(2):806-9
pubmed: 23267808
Pediatr Transplant. 2002 Jun;6(3):249-54
pubmed: 12100512
Eur J Pediatr. 1999 Dec;158 Suppl 2:S60-4
pubmed: 10603101
Blood. 2010 Apr 15;115(15):2998-3007
pubmed: 19633201
JIMD Rep. 2016;25:87-94
pubmed: 26219882
Liver Transpl. 2012 Jan;18(1):22-8
pubmed: 21987415
Transplantation. 2001 May 15;71(9):1346-8
pubmed: 11397976
Pediatr Transplant. 2010 May;14(3):E30-3
pubmed: 19490487
Clin Transplant. 2009 Aug-Sep;23(4):565-70
pubmed: 19191809
J Hepatol. 2013 Sep;59(3):595-612
pubmed: 23578885
J Heart Transplant. 1990 Sep-Oct;9(5):459-66; discussion 466-7
pubmed: 2231084
Am J Transplant. 2005 Sep;5(9):2324-7
pubmed: 16095518
Liver Transpl. 2015 Nov;21(11):1338-9
pubmed: 26335346
Pediatr Transplant. 2016 Aug;20(5):633-9
pubmed: 26857795
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Apr 19;154(8):571-2
pubmed: 21502660
N Engl J Med. 2005 Dec 1;353(22):2410-1
pubmed: 16319396
JIMD Rep. 2019 Jun 19;48(1):83-89
pubmed: 31392117
Liver Transpl. 2019 Jun;25(6):889-900
pubmed: 30712285
Liver Transpl. 2006 May;12(5):876-82
pubmed: 16628687
Intern Med. 1997 Nov;36(11):847
pubmed: 9392364
Transplant Proc. 1997 Feb-Mar;29(1-2):467-8
pubmed: 9123085
J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007 Apr;30(2):264
pubmed: 17310329
Am J Clin Nutr. 1998 Jul;68(1):72-81
pubmed: 9665099
Braz J Med Biol Res. 2014 Jun;47(6):522-6
pubmed: 24770567
Transplantation. 2004 Jan 27;77(2):324
pubmed: 14743007
Liver Transpl. 2015 Nov;21(11):1453-4
pubmed: 26122900
Am J Physiol. 1990 Apr;258(4 Pt 1):E654-60
pubmed: 2185648
Arch Surg. 1997 Oct;132(10):1145-7
pubmed: 9336517
Transplantation. 2003 Nov 15;76(9):1345-50
pubmed: 14627914
Mol Genet Metab. 2010 Apr;99(4):333-45
pubmed: 20061171
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jun 2;352(22):2356
pubmed: 15930432
Liver Transpl. 2003 Jun;9(6):632-3
pubmed: 12783409
Pediatr Res. 2006 Jan;59(1):17-20
pubmed: 16326996
Pediatr Transplant. 2016 May;20(3):395-400
pubmed: 26869348
J Pediatr. 2012 Jan;160(1):116-21.e1
pubmed: 21839471
Liver Int. 2011 Nov;31(10):1589-92
pubmed: 22093334