Patel, Madhukar

Limited information on the business practices of liver transplant (LT) centers worldwide has been published. Characterizing this data could help identify best practices as well as opportunities for improvement. As such, the International Liver Transplant Society (ILTS) Business Practice Committee conducted a global online survey of LT centers, which was sent to the ILTS membership. Questions focused on 5 main domains: transplant practice and volumes, workforce, finances, quality assessment and performance improvement, and overall program function. Data was compared across program geographic regions and transplant volume. A total of 89 discrete centers were represented, of which 76.4% were academic/university-affiliated, and about one-third each were from Europe (36.0%) and North America (31.5%). The top 3 problems programs reported were finances/funding (60.7%), adequate program support/guidance (48.3%), and transplant volumes (43.8%). In all, 59.6% of respondents felt their salary was undercompensated, consistent across geographic regions. In addition, 69.7% felt their center was not adequately funded to meet program goals, with programs in Europe (N=28/32, 87.5%) and Oceania (N=2/3, 66.7%) most impacted. Transplant surgeon retainment was noted as more difficult for lower volume programs (<50 liver transplants/year, N=13/31). Nearly half (42.7%) of all programs felt under-resourced to provide high-quality care, and the majority (80.9%) felt there was room for growth and improvement under their current model. While international concerns varied widely among LT centers, inadequate salary and center funding, low transplant and referral volumes, and staff retainment were persistent themes. Focusing on adopting region-specific best practices and developing transplant systems of care that focus on these elements is critical to provide optimal care to LT patients worldwide.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an established therapy with curative intent for pediatric and adult patients with acute liver failure and end-stage liver disease. Donor safety remains paramount and commences during preoperative evaluation and assessment. Given the importance of the topic, the International Liver Transplantation Society and International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group consensus conference on Living Liver Donor Safety was convened in March 2025 (Toronto, Canada). Recommendations were based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system for assessment of recommendations, and the Danish model of consensus was followed. This report presents 28 recommendations from the working group focused on addressing clinically relevant questions related to the preoperative aspects of living donor safety including assessment of donor acceptability (age, body mass index and hepatic steatosis; medical conditions and contraindications), medical and surgical workup (liver function and procoagulant workup; anatomical considerations and safe remnant), and psychosocial evaluation (timing and team; underlying conditions; non-directed, paired, and anonymous directed donors; urgent living donor workups for acute liver failure).

The 2024 Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS) was from May 1–4 in Houston, Texas, USA, under the theme “Liver Disease and Transplantation: Breaking Barriers and Exploring New Frontiers.” In addition to a robust scientific program, the congress also hosted a hands-on cadaveric robotic liver surgery course, a machine perfusion workshop, and a transesophageal echocardiography course. In this report, the ILTS Vanguard and Basic Sciences Committees present a summary of the congress proceedings.

AbstractBackground and AimsIdentifying international differences in utilization and outcomes of liver transplantation (LT) after donation after circulatory death (DCD) donation provides a unique opportunity for benchmarking and population‐level insight.MethodsAdult (≥18 years) LT data between 2008 and 2018 from the UK and US were used to assess mortality and graft failure after DCD LT. We used time‐dependent Cox‐regression methods to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for risk‐adjusted short‐term (0–90 days) and longer‐term (90 days–5 years) outcomes.ResultsOne‐thousand five‐hundred‐and‐sixty LT receipts from the UK and 3426 from the US were included. Over the study period, the use of DCD livers increased from 15.7% to 23.9% in the UK compared to 5.1% to 7.6% in the US. In the UK, DCD donors were older (UK:51 vs. US:33 years) with longer cold ischaemia time (UK: 437 vs. US: 333 min). Recipients in the US had higher Model for End‐stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, higher body mass index, higher proportions of ascites, encephalopathy, diabetes and previous abdominal surgeries. No difference in the risk‐adjusted short‐term mortality or graft failure was observed between the countries. In the longer‐term (90 days–5 years), the UK had lower mortality and graft failure (adj.mortality HR:UK: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.49–0.80); graft failure HR: UK: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.91). The cumulative incidence of retransplantation was higher in the UK (5 years: UK: 11.9% vs. 4.6%; p < .001).ConclusionsFor those receiving a DCD LT, longer‐term post‐transplant outcomes in the UK are superior to the US, however, significant differences in recipient illness, graft quality and access to retransplantation were seen between the two countries.

Abstract Background and Aims Following liver resection (LR) for HCC, the likelihood of survival is dynamic, in that multiple recurrences and/or metastases are possible, each having variable impacts on outcomes. We sought to evaluate the natural progression, pattern, and timing of various disease states after LR for HCC using multistate modeling and to create a practical calculator to provide prognostic information for patients and clinicians. Approach and Results Adult patients undergoing LR for HCC between January 2000 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified at a single center. Multistate analysis modeled post‐LR tumor progression by describing transitions between distinct disease states. In this model, the states included surgery, intrahepatic recurrence (first, second, third, fourth, fifth), distant metastasis with or without intrahepatic recurrence, and death. Of the 486 patients included, 169 (34.8%) remained recurrence‐free, 205 (42.2%) developed intrahepatic recurrence, 80 (16.5%) developed distant metastasis, and 32 (7%) died. For an average patient having undergone LR, there was a 33.1% chance of remaining disease‐free, a 31.0% chance of at least one intrahepatic recurrence, a 16.3% chance of distant metastasis, and a 19.8% chance of death within the first 60 months post‐LR. The transition probability from surgery to first intrahepatic recurrence, without a subsequent state transition, increased from 3% (3 months) to 17.4% (30 months) and 17.2% (60 months). Factors that could modify these probabilities included tumor size, satellite lesions, and microvascular invasion. The online multistate model calculator can be found on https://multistatehcc.shinyapps.io/home/. Conclusions In contrast to standard single time‐to‐event estimates, multistate modeling provides more realistic prognostication of outcomes after LR for HCC by taking into account many postoperative disease states and transitions between them. Our multistate modeling calculator can provide meaningful data to guide the management of patients undergoing postoperative surveillance and therapy.