Reassessing Geographic, Logistical, and Cold Ischemia Cutoffs in Liver Transplantation.

Introduction: Liver acceptance patterns vary significantly between transplant centers. Data pertaining to outcomes of livers declined by local and regional centers and allocated nationally remains limited.

Project aim: The objective was to compare post-liver transplant outcomes between liver allografts transplanted as a result of national and local-regional allocation.

Design: This was a retrospective evaluation of 109 nationally allocated liver allografts used for transplant by a single center. Outcomes of nationally allocated grafts were compared to standard allocation grafts (N  =  505) during the same period.

Results: Recipients of nationally allocated grafts had lower model for end stage liver disease scores (17 vs 22, P  =  .001). Nationally allocated grafts were more likely to be post-cross clamp offers (29.4% vs 13.4%, P  =  .001) and have longer cold ischemia times (median hours 7.8 vs 5.5, P  =  .001). Early allograft dysfunction was common (54.1% vs 52.5%, P  =  .75) and did not impact hospital length of stay (median 5 vs 6 days, P  =  .89). There were no differences in biliary complications (P  =  .11). There were no differences in patient (P  =  .88) or graft survival (P  =  .35). In a multivariate model, after accounting for differences in cold ischemia time and posttransplant biliary complications, nationally allocated grafts were not associated with increased risk for graft loss (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-1.8). Abnormal liver biopsy findings (33.0%) followed by donor donation after circulatory death status (22.9%) were the most common reasons for decline by local-regional centers.

Conclusion: Despite longer cold ischemia times, patient and graft survival outcomes remain excellent and comparable to those seen from standard allocation grafts.