Barnhill, Michele

Background: Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) may reduce preservation injury in donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD) liver transplantation, but its association with patient-centered recovery and longer-term graft survival remains uncertain. Study Design: We retrospectively analyzed 306 consecutive adult DCD liver transplant recipients at a single center from January 2019 through December 2022, comparing NMP (n=95) with static cold storage (SCS; n=211). The primary endpoint was days alive and out of hospital at 365 days (DAOH365). Quasi-Poisson regression evaluated factors associated with DAOH365, and Cox regression evaluated graft survival. Propensity-matched and calendar-year sensitivity analyses assessed measured confounding. Results: Median DAOH365 was 357.0 (352.0, 360.0) days with NMP versus 353.0 (336.0, 359.0) with SCS (p<0.001), but preservation strategy was not independently associated with DAOH365 (adjusted rate ratio 1.02; p=0.331). NMP recipients had less early allograft dysfunction (35.8% vs 59.7%; p<0.001), ischemic cholangiopathy (4.2% vs 23.7%; p<0.001), and retransplantation within 2 years (0.0% vs 6.6%; p=0.007). Two-year patient survival did not differ significantly. NMP was associated with improved twoF-year graft survival (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.23–6.87; p=0.015), an association maintained in propensity-matched and calendar-year sensitivity analyses. Adjusted total 1-year costs did not differ (p=0.512). Conclusions: In this single-center DCD cohort, NMP was associated with superior 2-year graft survival but not independently with DAOH365. These hypothesis-generating findings support multicenter prospective evaluation of NMP using both graft survival and patient-centered recovery endpoints.

Objective: To determine whether normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) mitigates the historical survival disadvantage of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation compared with donation after brain death (DBD) livers. Summary Background Data: NMP has improved outcomes in DCD LT compared with static cold storage (SCS), but whether it eliminates the historical disparity relative to DBD transplantation remains uncertain. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult LT at a high-volume US center between 2019 and 2024. Outcomes of DCD-NMP grafts were compared with DCD-SCS, DBD-SCS, and DBD-NMP grafts. Primary outcomes were 1-year graft and patient survival. Secondary outcomes included early allograft dysfunction (EAD), hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), primary nonfunction (PNF), biliary anastomotic strictures (BAS), and ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Results: Among 1338 liver transplants (DBD-SCS n=527; DBD-NMP n=142; DCD-SCS n=255; DCD-NMP n=414), DCD-NMP grafts had a significantly higher donor risk profile ( P <0.001) yet demonstrated survival comparable to DBD transplantation. One-year graft survival was 94% for DCD-NMP versus 93% for DBD grafts and 86% for DCD-SCS, and 1-year patient survival was 98% for DCD-NMP versus 94% to 95% for DBD grafts and 93% for DCD-SCS. In adjusted models, DCD-SCS was associated with increased hazards of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.48; P <0.001) and death (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.39; P =0.004), whereas DBD groups did not differ from DCD-NMP. Incidence of EAD was lower with DCD-NMP (21.7%) than DCD-SCS (50.2%) and similar to DBD grafts (21.1%–26.4%); HAT and PNF were rare (≤1.3%). At 1 year, BAS occurred in 36% of DCD grafts versus 17% to 23% of DBD grafts. IC occurred in 7.7% of DCD-NMP compared with 22% of DCD-SCS and ≤1.5% of DBD grafts. Retransplantation due to IC was infrequent overall (1.3%), but more common in DCD-SCS (4.7%) than DCD-NMP (1.0%) and DBD grafts (≤0.4%). Conclusions: NMP enables safe utilization of DCD liver allografts and achieves graft and patient survival comparable to DBD LT, mitigating the historical disadvantage of DCD grafts. These findings support routine integration of NMP into clinical practice and efforts to standardize its implementation.

Background: Given aspirin’s biologic plausibility for antifibrotic and antineoplastic effects, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between aspirin use and major liver-related outcomes in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis restricted exclusively to patients with biopsy- or registry-confirmed MASLD. Methods: A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed in October 2025. Studies enrolling adults with a confirmed MASLD diagnosis were included; those with viral hepatitis or alcohol-related liver disease were excluded. Outcomes assessed included hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), fibrosis progression, cirrhosis, all-cause and liver-related mortality, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, and liver disease progression. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were pooled using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Results: Seven studies met the eligibility criteria, with approximately 720,000 individuals included. Pooled analysis showed that aspirin use was associated with a significantly lower HCC risk (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.43–0.81; I2 = 83%). No statistically significant association was found between aspirin use and cirrhosis incidence (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.13–2.37; I2 = 83.4%) or GI bleeding (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.74–1.66; I2 = 98.9%). Among the two studies that explored all-cause mortality, aspirin was associated with a modest but statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.78–0.95; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: Aspirin use is associated with a reduced risk of HCC and all-cause mortality in MASLD without significantly increasing GI bleeding or hemorrhagic strokes. These associations may reflect aspirin’s anti-inflammatory properties in liver disease. Further RCTs are needed to verify the causal role of aspirin in MASLD management.