Zhang, Nan

Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) enables preservation and functional assessment of liver allografts, improving outcomes, particularly in marginal organs. However, the TransMedics Organ Care System (OCS) permits only single hepatic artery (HA) cannulation, limiting its use in grafts with variant arterial anatomy. Arterial reconstruction before NMP may overcome this limitation and expand the pool of grafts eligible for perfusion. We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of adult liver transplants utilizing OCS from January 2022 to September 2024. Allografts with variant hepatic artery anatomy requiring arterial reconstruction before NMP initiation were identified. Postoperative outcomes, including vascular and biliary complications, were compared between reconstructed and non-reconstructed grafts. Among 541 OCS-preserved grafts, 74 (13.7%) underwent arterial reconstruction. Compared with non-reconstructed grafts, reconstructed grafts had longer cross-clamp to cannulation time (2.8 vs. 2.4 h, p <0.001), but similar rates of early allograft dysfunction (23.0% vs. 20.8%, p =0.65), ischemic cholangiopathy (4.1% vs. 4.1%, p =1.00), and primary nonfunction (0.0% vs. 0.4%, p =1.00). Early (2.7% vs. 0.2%, p =0.05) and late hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) (4.1% vs. 2.1%, p =0.40) were infrequent and not significantly different between non-reconstructed and reconstructed groups, respectively. Hepatic artery stenosis occurred more often in reconstructed grafts (12.2% vs. 4.1%, p =0.008), though most cases were managed with interventional radiology or surgical revision. Only one reconstructed graft required retransplantation due to vascular complications. Arterial reconstruction before NMP is safe and feasible, enabling successful perfusion and transplantation of liver allografts with variant HA anatomy. These findings support the broader application of NMP in anatomically complex donor livers.

Abstract Background Guidelines to provide recommendations about driving restrictions for patients with brain metastases are lacking. We aim to determine whether clinical neurologic examination is sufficient to predict suitability to drive in these patients by comparison with an occupational therapy driving assessment (OTDA). Methods We prospectively evaluated the concordance between neurology assessment of suitability to drive (pass/fail) and OTDA in 41 individuals with brain metastases. Neuro-oncology evaluation included an interview and neurological examination. Participants subsequently underwent OTDA during which a battery of objective measures of visual, cognitive, and motor skills related to driving was administered. Results The mean age of patients who failed OTDA was age 68.9 years vs 59.3 years in the group members who passed (P = .0046). The sensitivity of the neurology assessment to predict driving fitness compared with OTDA was 16.1% and the specificity 90%. The 31 patients who failed OTDA were more likely to fail Vision Coach, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Trail Making B tests. Conclusions There was poor association between the assessment of suitability to drive by neurologists and the outcome of the OTDA in patients with brain metastases. Subtle deficits that may impair the ability to drive safely may not be evident on neurologic examination. The positive predictive value was high to predict OTDA failure. Age could be a factor affecting OTDA performance. The results raise questions about the choice of assessments in making recommendations about driving fitness in people with brain metastases. OTDA should be strongly considered in patients with brain metastases who wish to continue driving.