We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses evaluating the effects of different intraoperative vasoactive drugs on acute kidney injury (AKI) and other perioperative outcomes in adult liver transplant recipients. We searched multiple electronic databases using words from the "liver transplantation" and "vasoactive drug" domains. We included all randomized controlled trials conducted in adult liver transplant recipients comparing 2 different intravenous vasoactive drugs or 1 against a standard of care that reported AKI, intraoperative blood loss, or any other postoperative outcome. We conducted 4 frequentist network meta-analyses using random effect models, based on the interventions' mechanism of action, and evaluated the quality of evidence (QoE) using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations recommendations. We included 9 randomized controlled trials comparing different vasopressor drugs (vasoconstrictor or inotrope), 3 comparing a somatostatin infusion (or its analogues) to a standard of care, 11 comparing different vasodilator infusions together or against a standard of care, and 2 comparing vasoconstrictor boluses at graft reperfusion. Intravenous clonidine was associated with shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit, and hospital length of stay (very low QoE), and some vasodilators were associated with lower creatinine level 24 h after surgery (low to very low QoE). Phenylephrine and terlipressin were associated with less intraoperative blood loss when compared with norepinephrine (low and moderate QoE). None of the vasoactive drugs improve any other postoperative outcomes, including AKI. There is still important equipoise regarding the best vasoactive drug to use in liver transplantation for most outcomes. Further studies are required to better inform clinical practice.

BACKGROUND:

Focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) is a common cause of end-stage kidney disease and frequently recurs after kidney transplantation. Recurrent FSGS (rFSGS) is associated with poor allograft and patient outcomes. Bleselumab, a fully human immunoglobulin G4 anti-CD40 antagonistic monoclonal antibody, disrupts CD40-related processes in FSGS, potentially preventing rFSGS.

METHODS:

A phase 2a, randomized, multicenter, open-label study of adult recipients (aged ≥18 y) of a living or deceased donor kidney transplant with a history of biopsy-proven primary FSGS. The study assessed the efficacy of bleselumab combined with tacrolimus and corticosteroids as maintenance immunosuppression in the prevention of rFSGS >12 mo posttransplantation, versus standard of care (SOC) comprising tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids. All patients received basiliximab induction. The primary endpoint was rFSGS, defined as proteinuria (protein-creatinine ratio ≥3.0 g/g) with death, graft loss, or loss to follow-up imputed as rFSGS, through 3 mo posttransplant.

RESULTS:

Sixty-three patients were followed for 12 mo posttransplantation. Relative decrease in rFSGS occurrence through 3 mo with bleselumab versus SOC was 40.7% (95% confidence interval, -89.8 to 26.8; P = 0.37; absolute decrease 12.7% [95% confidence interval, -34.5 to 9.0]). Central-blinded biopsy review found relative (absolute) decreases in rFSGS of 10.9% (3.9%), 17.0% (6.2%), and 20.5% (7.5%) at 3, 6, and 12 mo posttransplant, respectively; these differences were not statistically significant. Adverse events were similar for both treatments. No deaths occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS:

In at-risk kidney transplant recipients, bleselumab numerically reduced proteinuria occurrence versus SOC, but no notable difference in occurrence of biopsy-proven rFSGS was observed.

BACKGROUND:

Patients after kidney transplantation eventually face the risk of graft loss with the concomitant need for dialysis or retransplantation. Choosing the right kidney replacement therapy after graft loss is an important preference-sensitive decision for kidney transplant recipients. However, the rate of conversations about treatment options after kidney graft loss has been shown to be as low as 13% in previous studies. It is unknown whether the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based risk prediction models can increase the number of conversations about treatment options after graft loss and how this might influence the associated shared decision-making (SDM).

OBJECTIVE:

This study aims to explore the impact of AI-based risk prediction for the risk of graft loss on the frequency of conversations about the treatment options after graft loss, as well as the associated SDM process.

METHODS:

This is a 2-year, prospective, randomized, 2-armed, parallel-group, single-center trial in a German kidney transplant center. All patients will receive the same routine post-kidney transplant care that usually includes follow-up visits every 3 months at the kidney transplant center. For patients in the intervention arm, physicians will be assisted by a validated and previously published AI-based risk prediction system that estimates the risk for graft loss in the next year, starting from 3 months after randomization until 24 months after randomization. The study population will consist of 122 kidney transplant recipients >12 months after transplantation, who are at least 18 years of age, are able to communicate in German, and have an estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Patients with multi-organ transplantation, or who are not able to communicate in German, as well as underage patients, cannot participate. For the primary end point, the proportion of patients who have had a conversation about their treatment options after graft loss is compared at 12 months after randomization. Additionally, 2 different assessment tools for SDM, the CollaboRATE mean score and the Control Preference Scale, are compared between the 2 groups at 12 months and 24 months after randomization. Furthermore, recordings of patient-physician conversations, as well as semistructured interviews with patients, support persons, and physicians, are performed to support the quantitative results.

RESULTS:

The enrollment for the study is ongoing. The first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2025.

CONCLUSIONS:

This is the first study to examine the influence of AI-based risk prediction on physician-patient interaction in the context of kidney transplantation. We use a mixed methods approach by combining a randomized design with a simple quantitative end point (frequency of conversations), different quantitative measurements for SDM, and several qualitative research methods (eg, records of physician-patient conversations and semistructured interviews) to examine the implementation of AI-based risk prediction in the clinic.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06056518; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06056518.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):

PRR1-10.2196/54857.

INTRODUCTION:

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) studies demonstrate the impact of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on the physical and psychosocial development of children. While several instruments are used to measure HRQoL, few have standardized domains specific to pediatric ESRD. This review examines current evidence on self and proxy-reported HRQoL among pediatric patients with ESRD, based on the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) questionnaires.

METHODS:

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on HRQoL using the PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scale (GCS) and the PedsQL 3.0 ESRD Module among 5- to 18-year-old patients. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Retrospective, case-controlled, and cross-sectional studies using PedsQL were included.

FINDINGS:

Of 435 identified studies, 14 met inclusion criteria administered in several countries. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher total HRQoL for healthy patients over those with ESRD (SMD:1.44 [95% CI: 0.78-2.09]) across all dimensional scores. In addition, kidney transplant patients reported a significantly higher HRQoL than those on dialysis (PedsQL GCS, SMD: 0.33 [95% CI: 0.14-0.53]) and (PedsQL ESRD, SMD: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.39-0.90]) concordant with parent-proxy reports.

DISCUSSION:

Patients with ESRD reported lower HRQoL in physical and psychosocial domains compared with healthy controls, while transplant and peritoneal dialysis patients reported better HRQoL than those on hemodialysis. This analysis demonstrates the need to identify dimensions of impaired functioning and produce congruent clinical interventions. Further research on the impact of individual comorbidities in HRQoL is necessary for developing comprehensive, integrated, and holistic treatment programs.

INTRODUCTION:

Improved outcomes of liver disease in childhood and young adulthood have resulted in an increasing number of young adults (YA) entering adult liver services. The adult hepatologist therefore requires a working knowledge in diseases that arise almost exclusively in children and their complications in adulthood.

AIMS:

To provide adult hepatologists with succinct guidelines on aspects of transitional care in YA relevant to key disease aetiologies encountered in clinical practice.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search was undertaken using the Pubmed, Medline, Web of Knowledge and Cochrane database from 1980 to 2023. MeSH search terms relating to liver diseases ('cholestatic liver diseases', 'biliary atresia', 'metabolic', 'paediatric liver diseases', 'autoimmune liver diseases'), transition to adult care ('transition services', 'young adult services') and adolescent care were used. The quality of evidence and the grading of recommendations were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS:

These guidelines deal with the transition of YA and address key aetiologies for the adult hepatologist under the following headings: (1) Models and provision of care; (2) screening and management of mental health disorders; (3) aetiologies; (4) timing and role of liver transplantation; and (5) sexual health and fertility.

CONCLUSIONS:

These are the first nationally developed guidelines on the transition and management of childhood liver diseases in adulthood. They provide a framework upon which to base clinical care, which we envisage will lead to improved outcomes for YA with chronic liver disease.

Delayed graft function (DGF) is a common post-operative complication with potential long-term sequelae for many kidney transplant recipients, and hemodynamic factors and fluid status play a role. Fixed perioperative fluid infusions are the standard of care, but more recent evidence in the non-transplant population has suggested benefit with goal-directed fluid strategies based on hemodynamic targets. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry and Google Scholar through December 2022 for randomized controlled trials comparing risk of DGF between goal-directed and conventional fluid therapy in adults receiving a living or deceased donor kidney transplant. Effect estimates were reported with odds ratios (OR) and pooled using random effects meta-analysis. We identified 4 studies (205 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The use of goal-directed fluid therapy had no significant effect on DGF (OR 1.37 95% CI, 0.34-5.6; p = 0.52; I2 = 0.11). Subgroup analysis examining effects among deceased and living kidney donation did not reveal significant differences in the effects of fluid strategy on DGF between subgroups. Overall, the strength of the evidence for goal-directed versus conventional fluid therapy to reduce DGF was of low certainty. Our findings highlight the need for larger trials to determine the effect of goal-directed fluid therapy on this patient-centered outcome.

BACKGROUND:

Liver transplantation is a life-saving therapy for end-stage liver disease patients, but acute cellular rejection (ACR) and graft complications remain significant postoperative challenges. Early and accurate diagnosis is crucial for timely intervention and improved patient outcomes, but their diagnosis rely currently on invasive biopsy sampling, thus prompting the search for non-invasive Biomarkers. MicroRNA (miRNA) have emerged as promising biomarkers in various pathological conditions, and their potential utility in diagnosing acute cellular rejection after liver transplantation has gained significant interest.

METHODS:

This systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry analyzes studies exploring miRNA as biomarkers for ACR and graft dysfunction in liver transplantation (PROSPERO ID CRD42023465278). The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias was employed. Population data, identified miRNA and their dynamic regulation, as well as event prediction were compared. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS:

Thirteen studies were included in this systematic review. Various investigated miRNAs were upregulated in association with acute cellular rejection, like miR-122, miR-155, miR-181, miR-483-3p, and miR-885-5p, demonstrating great biomarker potential. Additionally, several studies conducted target gene analysis, revealing insights into cellular mechanisms linked to ACR. Moreover, various miRNA were also capable of predicting different organ complications following transplantation, expanding their versatility. Remaining challenges include the standardization of miRNA profiling, the need for functional validation, and the necessity for long-term studies.

CONCLUSION:

The results highlight the potential of miRNA as specific, non-invasive biomarkers for ACR and graft dysfunction following liver transplantation. However, further research is needed to validate these findings and establish standardized diagnostic panels to incorporate them into clinical practice and explore miRNA-based therapies in the future.

BACKGROUND AND AIM:

Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes otherwise discarded livers as donor grafts for another recipients. It is unclear whether DLT has less favorable outcomes compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). We aimed to assess the outcomes of DLT compared to DDLT.

METHODS:

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science database were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes after DLT with DDLT. Data were pooled using random-effects modeling, evaluating odds ratios (OR) or mean difference (MD) for outcomes including waiting list time, severe hemorrhage, intensive care unit (ICU), length hospital stay (LOS), rejection, renal, vascular, and biliary events, and recipient survival at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years.

RESULTS:

Five studies were identified including 945 patients (DLT = 409, DDLT = 536). The DLT recipients were older compared to the DDLT group (P = 0.04), and both cohorts were comparable regarding lab MELD, hepatocellular carcinoma, and waitlist time. There were no differences in vascular (OR: 1.60, P = 0.39), renal (OR: 0.62, P = 0.24), biliary (OR: 1.51, P = 0.21), severe hemorrhage (OR: 1.09, P = 0.86), rejection (OR: 0.78, P = 0.51), ICU stay (MD: 0.50, P = 0.21), or LOS (MD: 1.68, P = 0.46) between DLT and DDLT. DLT and DDLT were associated with comparable 1-year (78.9% vs 80.4%; OR: 1.03, P = 0.89), 3-year (56.2% vs 54.1%; OR: 1.35, P = 0.07), and 10-year survival (6.5% vs 8.5%; OR: 0.8, P = 0.67) rates. DLT was associated with higher 5-year survival (41.6% vs 36.4%; OR: 1.70; P = 0.003) compared to DDLT, which was not confirmed at sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION:

This meta-analysis of the best available evidence (Level 2a) demonstrated that DLT and DDLT have comparable outcomes. As indications for liver transplantation expand, future high-quality research is encouraged to increase the DLT numbers in clinical practice, serving the growing waiting list candidates, with the caveat of uncertain de novo disease transmission risks.