Premium
Systematic review with meta‐analysis: liver transplant provides survival benefit in patients with acute on chronic liver failure
Author(s) -
Abdallah Mohamed A.,
Waleed Muhammad,
Bell Matthew G.,
Nelson Morgan,
Wong Robert,
Sundaram Vinay,
Singal Ashwani K.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
alimentary pharmacology and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.308
H-Index - 177
eISSN - 1365-2036
pISSN - 0269-2813
DOI - 10.1111/apt.15793
Subject(s) - medicine , liver transplantation , gastroenterology , meta analysis , liver disease , chronic liver disease , transplantation , cirrhosis
Summary Background Data on liver transplantation (LT) in acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) are scanty. Aim To perform meta‐analysis on outcomes after LT for ACLF compared with ACLF patients not receiving LT or with LT recipients for indications other than ACLF. Methods We pooled data from 12 studies on LT outcomes among ACLF patients. Results Among nine studies, 22 238 LT recipients for ACLF vs 30 791 for non‐ACLF were younger by 1.1 years, less males (64% vs 66.4%), and higher model for end‐stage disease score by 14.5 (14.4‐14.6), P < 0.01 for all. Post‐transplant patient survival at 30 day, 90 day, 6 months, 1 year and 5 years was lower in ACLF: 96.2% vs 98.1%, 92.6% vs 96.2%, 89.9% vs 94.4%, 86.0% vs 91.9%, 66.9% vs 80.7% respectively, P < 0.01 for all. ACLF patients stayed longer in hospital and ICU by 5.7 and 10.5 days respectively, P < 0.001, with similar post‐transplant complications [74.4% vs 55.5%, P = 0.12]. Among three studies, 441 LT recipients for ACLF vs 301 ACLF patients not selected for LT had better 30 day and 1 year survival: 95.2% vs 60% and 85.3% vs 28.2% respectively, P < 0.001. Outcomes were worse in ACLF‐3 and better for ACLF‐1 and ACLF‐2 patients at the time of LT. Conclusion In this pooled analysis with a large sample size across the globe, LT for select patients with ACLF provided survival benefit. However, larger prospective studies are needed to further refine selection criteria, especially for ACLF‐3 patients as basis for improving outcomes and optimal utilisation of scarce donor pool.