Use of very old donors in liver transplantation (LT) is controversial because advanced donor age is associated with a higher risk for graft dysfunction and worse long-term results, especially for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients. This was a retrospective, single-center review of primary, ABO-compatible LT performed between 2001 and 2010. Recipients were stratified in four groups based on donor age (<60 years; 60-69 years; 70-79 years and !80 years) and their outcomes were compared. A total of 842 patients were included: 348 (41.3%) with donors <60 years; 176 (20.9%) with donors 60-69 years; 233 (27.7%) with donors 70-79 years and 85 (10.1%) with donors !80 years. There was no difference across groups in terms of early ( 30 days) graft loss, and graft survival at 1 and 5 years was 90.5% and 78.6% for grafts <60 years; 88.6% and 81.3% for grafts 60-69 years; 87.6% and 75.1% for grafts 70-79 years and 84.7% and 77.1% for grafts !80 years (p ¼ 0.065). In the group !80 years, the 5-year graft survival was lower for HCV-positive versus HCV-negative recipients (62.4% vs. 85.6%, p ¼ 0.034). Based on our experience, grafts from donors !80 years may provide favorable results but require appropriate selection and allocation policies.

Although domino liver transplantation (LT) is an

Despite gaining wide consensus in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been poorly investigated for its role in the setting of salvage liver transplantation (SLT). A multicenter retrospective analysis was carried out in 6 Italian centers on 211 patients with HCC who were initially resected with open (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and eventually wait‐listed for SLT. The secondary endpoint was identification of risk factors for posttransplant death and tumor recurrence. The enrolled patients included 211 HCC patients resected with open surgery (n = 167) versus MILS (n = 44) and wait‐listed for SLT between January 2007 and December 2017. We analyzed the intention‐to‐treat survival of these patients. MILS was the most important protective factor for the composite risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11‐0.63; P = 0.003). MILS was also the only independent protective factor for the risk of post‐SLT patient death (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09‐0.93; P = 0.04). After propensity score matching, MILS was the only independent protective factor against the risk of delisting, posttransplant death, and HCC recurrence (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07‐0.75; P = 0.02). On the basis of the current analysis, MILS seems protective over open surgery for the risk of delisting, posttransplant patient death, and tumor recurrence. Larger prospective studies balancing liver function and tumor stage are strongly favored to better clarify the beneficial effect of MILS for HCC patients eventually referred to SLT.

No abstract