Risk assessment in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a two-center experience
Chase J Wehrle,Roma Raj,Marianna Maspero,Sangeeta Satish,Bijan Eghtesad,Alejandro Pita,Jaekeun Kim,Mazhar Khalil,Esteban Calderon,Danny Orabi,Bobby Zervos,Jamak Modaresi Esfeh,Maureen Whitsett Linganna,Teresa Diago-Uso,Masato Fujiki,Cristiano Quintini,Choon David Kwon,Charles Miller,Antonio Pinna,Federico Aucejo,Koji Hashimoto,Andrea Schlegel,Chase J. Wehrle
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/js9.0000000000001104
2024-01-22
International Journal of Surgery
Abstract:Background: Liver transplantation (LT) is a well-established treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but there are ongoing debates regarding outcomes and selection. This study examines the experience of LT for HCC at a high-volume center. Methods: A prospectively maintained database was used to identify HCC patients undergoing LT from 2000-2020 with > 3 years follow-up. Data was obtained from the center database and electronic medical records. The Metroticket 2.0 HCC-specific five-year survival scale was calculated for each patient. Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression analyses were employed assessing survival between groups based on Metroticket score and individual donor and recipient risk factors. Results: 569 patients met criteria. Median follow-up was 96.2 months (8.12 y; IQR 59.9-147.8). Three-year recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 88.6% (n=504) and 86.6% (n=493). Five-year RFS and OS were 78.9% (n=449) and 79.1% (n=450). Median Metroticket 2.0 score was 0.9 (IQR 0.9-0.95). Tumor size>3 cm ( P =0.012), increasing tumor number on imaging ( P =0.001) and explant pathology ( P <0.001) was associated with recurrence. Transplant within Milan ( P <0.001) or UCSF-criteria ( P <0.001) had lower recurrence rates. Increasing AFP-values were associated with more HCC-recurrence ( P <0.001) and reduced OS ( P =0.008). Chemoembolization was predictive of recurrence in the overall population ( P =0.043) and in those outside Milan criteria ( P =0.038). A receiver-operator curve using Metroticket 2.0 identified an optimal cut-off of projected survival > 87.5% for predicting recurrence. This cut-off was able to predict RFS ( P <0.001) in the total cohort and predict both, RFS ( P =0.007) and OS ( P =0.016) outside-Milan. Receipt of donation after brain death (DBD) grafts (55/478, 13%) or living-donor grafts (3/22, 13.6%) experienced better survival rates compared to donation after cardiac death (DCD) grafts (n=15/58, 25.6%, P =0.009). Donor age was associated with a higher HCC-recurrence ( P =0.006). Both total ischemia time (TIT)>6hours ( P =0.016) and increasing TIT correlated with higher HCC-recurrence ( P =0.027). The use of DCD-grafts for outside-Milan candidates was associated with increased recurrence ( P =0.039) and reduced survival ( P =0.033). Conclusion: This large two-center analysis confirms favorable outcomes after LT for HCC. Tumor size and number, pre-transplant AFP, and Milan criteria remain important recipient HCC-risk factors. A higher donor risk (i.e., donor age, DCD-grafts, ischemia time) was associated with poorer outcomes.
surgery