Factors Associated with Mortality and Graft Failure in Liver Transplants: A Hierarchical Approach

Background Liver transplantation has received increased attention in the medical field since the 1980s following the introduction of new immunosuppressants and improved surgical techniques. Currently, transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage liver disease, and it has been expanded for other indications. Liver transplantation outcomes depend on donor factors, operating conditions, and the disease stage of the recipient. A retrospective cohort was studied to identify mortality and graft failure rates and their associated factors. All adult liver transplants performed in the state of São Paulo, Brazil, between 2006 and 2012 were studied. Methods and Findings A hierarchical Poisson multiple regression model was used to analyze factors related to mortality and graft failure in liver transplants. A total of 2,666 patients, 18 years or older, (1,482 males; 1,184 females) were investigated. Outcome variables included mortality and graft failure rates, which were grouped into a single binary variable called negative outcome rate. Additionally, donor clinical, laboratory, intensive care, and organ characteristics and recipient clinical data were analyzed. The mortality rate was 16.2 per 100 person-years (py) (95% CI: 15.1–17.3), and the graft failure rate was 1.8 per 100 py (95% CI: 1.5–2.2). Thus, the negative outcome rate was 18.0 per 100 py (95% CI: 16.9–19.2). The best risk model demonstrated that recipient creatinine ≥ 2.11 mg/dl [RR = 1.80 (95% CI: 1.56–2.08)], total bilirubin ≥ 2.11 mg/dl [RR = 1.48 (95% CI: 1.27–1.72)], Na+ ≥ 141.01 mg/dl [RR = 1.70 (95% CI: 1.47–1.97)], RNI ≥ 2.71 [RR = 1.64 (95% CI: 1.41–1.90)], body surface ≥ 1.98 [RR = 0.81 (95% CI: 0.68–0.97)] and donor age ≥ 54 years [RR = 1.28 (95% CI: 1.11–1.48)], male gender [RR = 1.19(95% CI: 1.03–1.37)], dobutamine use [RR = 0.54 (95% CI: 0.36–0.82)] and intubation ≥ 6 days [RR = 1.16 (95% CI: 1.10–1.34)] affected the negative outcome rate. Conclusions The current study confirms that both donor and recipient characteristics must be considered in post-transplant outcomes and prognostic scores. Our data demonstrated that recipient characteristics have a greater impact on post-transplant outcomes than donor characteristics. This new concept makes liver transplant teams to rethink about the limits in a MELD allocation system, with many teams competing with each other. The results suggest that although we have some concerns about the donors features, the recipient factors were heaviest predictors for bad outcomes.

[1]  M. Rela,et al.  Matching donor to recipient in liver transplantation: Relevance in clinical practice. , 2013, World journal of hepatology.

[2]  M. Quante,et al.  Experience Since MELD Implementation: How Does the New System Deliver? , 2012, International journal of hepatology.

[3]  M. Rossi,et al.  Liver transplantation in adults: Choosing the appropriate timing. , 2012, World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics.

[4]  H. Putter,et al.  Validation of the donor risk index in orthotopic liver transplantation within the Eurotransplant region , 2012, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[5]  Philipp Dutkowski,et al.  Are There Better Guidelines for Allocation in Liver Transplantation?: A Novel Score Targeting Justice and Utility in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Era , 2011, Annals of surgery.

[6]  K. Höckerstedt,et al.  Long-Term Results of Liver Transplantation , 2011, Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society.

[7]  M. Goel,et al.  Understanding survival analysis: Kaplan-Meier estimate , 2010, International journal of Ayurveda research.

[8]  M. Masetti,et al.  Survival Benefit After Liver Transplantation: A Single European Center Experience , 2009, Transplantation.

[9]  M. Aldersley,et al.  Donor Risk Index and MELD Interactions in Predicting Long-Term Graft Survival: A Single-Centre Experience , 2009, Transplantation.

[10]  J. Perkins,et al.  D‐MELD, a Simple Predictor of Post Liver Transplant Mortality for Optimization of Donor/Recipient Matching , 2009, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[11]  J. Emond,et al.  Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation (SOFT) Score: A Novel Method to Predict Patient Survival Following Liver Transplantation , 2008, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[12]  M. L. de la Mata,et al.  Model for end-stage liver disease can predict very early outcome after liver transplantation. , 2008, Transplantation proceedings.

[13]  G. Santori,et al.  Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and organ allocation from cadaveric donors for 198 liver transplantation procedures performed in a single center. , 2008, Transplantation proceedings.

[14]  M. Manns,et al.  Prediction of survival after liver transplantation by pre-transplant parameters , 2008, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[15]  L. Yan,et al.  Impact of pretransplant MELD score on posttransplant outcome in orthotopic liver transplantation for patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure. , 2007, Transplantation proceedings.

[16]  Xianggui Qu,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis , 2007, Technometrics.

[17]  J. Cameron,et al.  One Thousand Consecutive Pancreaticoduodenectomies , 2006, Annals of surgery.

[18]  Johnny C. Hong,et al.  Optimal Utilization of Donor Grafts With Extended Criteria: A Single-Center Experience in Over 1000 Liver Transplants , 2006, Annals of surgery.

[19]  J. Bragg-Gresham,et al.  Characteristics Associated with Liver Graft Failure: The Concept of a Donor Risk Index , 2006, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[20]  R. Wolfe,et al.  The Survival Benefit of Liver Transplantation , 2005, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[21]  D. Posada,et al.  Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of akaike information criterion and bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. , 2004, Systematic biology.

[22]  Mark S Roberts,et al.  Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease‐specific analysis of the UNOS database , 2004, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[23]  R. Wiesner,et al.  Improving liver allocation: MELD and PELD , 2004, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[24]  M. Morrisey,et al.  MELD score predicts 1‐year patient survival post‐orthotopic liver transplantation , 2003, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[25]  M. Zeier,et al.  The effect of donor gender on graft survival. , 2002, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[26]  Sammy Saab,et al.  Pretransplant Model to Predict Posttransplant Survival in Liver Transplant Patients , 2002, Annals of surgery.

[27]  A. Campos,et al.  Nutritional aspects of liver transplantation , 2002, Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care.

[28]  Kenneth Portier,et al.  Robust Diagnostic Regression Analysis , 2002, Technometrics.

[29]  T M Therneau,et al.  A model to predict survival in patients with end‐stage liver disease , 2001, Hepatology.

[30]  S. Huttly,et al.  The role of conceptual frameworks in epidemiological analysis: a hierarchical approach. , 1997, International journal of epidemiology.

[31]  J. Hoofnagle,et al.  Donor age and outcome of liver transplantation , 1996, Hepatology.

[32]  A Morabia,et al.  On the origin of Hill's causal criteria. , 1991, Epidemiology.

[33]  D. Harrington,et al.  Counting Processes and Survival Analysis , 1991 .

[34]  R. Tuttle,et al.  Dobutamine: DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW CATECHOLAMINE TO SELECTIVELY INCREASE CARDIAC CONTRACTILITY , 1975, Circulation research.

[35]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[36]  Katharina Burger,et al.  Counting Processes And Survival Analysis , 2016 .

[37]  W. López,et al.  Estudos de Psicologia , 2011 .

[38]  Carlos Silva,et al.  Epidemiologia explicada - Análise de Sobrevivência , 2009 .

[39]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed. , 2009 .

[40]  D. E. Schaubela,et al.  The Survival Benefit of Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation as a Function of Candidate Disease Severity and Donor Quality , 2008 .

[41]  R. Wiesner,et al.  Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and allocation of donor livers. , 2003, Gastroenterology.

[42]  G. Abbad,et al.  Regressão múltipla stepwise e hierárquica em Psicologia Organizacional: aplicações, problemas e soluções , 2002 .