It is a common practice to immunize patients against hepatitis B infection while they are waiting for liver transplantation, but the efficacy of this practice is unclear. This is a retrospective analysis of the antibody response to 20 g of a recombinant hepatitis B vaccine in patients waiting for and after liver transplantation. The response to vaccination was measured 1-3 months after completion of the vaccination series. The risk of acquiring hepatitis B virus after liver transplant was determined by reviewing the results of tests for hepatitis B infection in 171 patients who underwent transplantation for non-hepatitis B diseases and who had not been vaccinated. Fiftyseven patients awaiting transplantation were eligible for the study, and a response to vaccination was observed in only 9 (16%). Patients with cholestatic liver disease had a significantly higher response (6 of 14; 43%) compared with noncholestatic liver disease (3 of 43; 7%; P ‫؍‬ .004). Fortyfive liver transplant recipients were immunized against hepatitis B after transplantation, and only 3 (6.7%) developed an antibody response. The frequency of posttransplant hepatitis B infection in the 171 patients who were not immunized and who lacked any evidence of hepatitis B infection pretransplantation was 4 of 171 (2.3%). The response rate to immunization with a recombinant hepatitis B vaccine in patients with chronic liver disease who are waiting for a liver transplant and after transplantation is poor. Given the poor response to vaccination and the low risk of acquiring hepatitis B virus after transplantation, centers need to reconsider the routine use of the hepatitis B virus vaccine in patients awaiting liver transplantation.

A significant number of patients did not tolerate interferon-alpha or ribavirin. Although BR was excellent and mean viral loads decreased significantly, virological clearance was poor and no histological improvement was noted. A more efficacious treatment with less adverse effects for recurrent HCV after liver transplantation is needed.

Reports indicate peripheral eosinophilia (PE) and gastrointestinal eosinophilic inflammation can occur after pediatric liver transplantation. The incidence of these conditions, potential risk factors, and the impact of PE and gastrointestinal eosinophilic inflammation on liver transplant outcome were determined in this pediatric liver transplant program. Medical records of liver transplant recipients from 1 to 97 and from 12 to 99 were reviewed. Fifty-seven transplants on 54 patients were performed during the study period. Fifty-three patients were evaluated; all had normal pre-transplantation peripheral eosinophil counts. PE of > 10% developed in 28% of patients. Using this definition, all such identified patients had absolute eosinophil counts of > 350/mm3. History of immediate hypersensitivity did not differ between patients with or without eosinophilia. Gastrointestinal endoscopy and biopsy was performed in 23 patients with gastrointestinal complaints. Of those, six had eosinophilic gastroenteritis and all six had PE. Compared with patients without eosinophilia, those with PE were younger at the time of transplantation (p < 0.05), had more frequent rejection (p < 0.01), were more commonly managed with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression (p < 0.001), and experienced more frequent episodes of detectable EBV viral load (p < 0.04). Patients with eosinophilic gastroenteritis were more frequently retransplanted (p < 0.006). PE associated with symptomatic eosinophilic gastroenteritis is common after pediatric liver transplantation. Age at transplant, frequency of rejection episodes, tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, and EBV viral load may be associated with the development of this condition. There may be higher rates of graft loss in such patients. Whether innate immune responsiveness or an acquired immune dysregulation accounts for these findings merits further evaluation.

Daclizumab 1 mg/kg given immediately after pediatric liver transplantation and withholding tacrolimus, is safe, efficacious, and reduces rejections within the first 30 days after surgery.

The pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of a once-daily formulation of tacrolimus (tacrolimus extended-release formulation; XL formerly referred to as MR or MR4) were assessed in 18 stable pediatric liver transplant recipients who were converted from the twice-a-day formulation of tacrolimus (TAC) to XL. Patients received their twice-a-day dose of TAC on study days 1 through 7. Beginning on the morning of study day 8, patients were converted to XL on a 1:1 (mg:mg) basis for their total daily dose, and were maintained on a once-daily AM dosing regimen using the same therapeutic monitoring and patient care techniques employed with TAC. Based on pharmacokinetic profiles obtained on study days 7 (TAC) and 14 (XL), steady state exposure (AUC 0-24 ) was equivalent between XL and TAC; the mean XL/TAC ratio for lnAUC 0-24 was 100.9% (90% CI: 90.8%, 112.1%). AUC 0-24 and C min were strongly correlated at steady state (correlation coefficient: XL 0.90, TAC 0.94). During the first year post-conversion, there were no cases of acute rejection, discontinuation of XL, graft loss or death. The safety profile of XL was consistent with that known for TAC. These results support the safe and convenient conversion of pediatric liver transplant recipients from twice-a-day TAC to once-daily XL.

No abstract

Transplanting blood group A, B, or O (ABO)-incompatible (ABO-I) liver grafts has resulted in lower patient and graft survival with an increased incidence of vascular and biliary complications and rejection. We report that, without modification of our standard immunosuppression protocol, crossing blood groups is an acceptable option for children requiring liver transplantation. In our study, ABO-I liver grafts-regardless of recipient age-have comparable long-term survival (mean follow-up of 3.25 yr) with ABO-compatible grafts without any difference in rejection, vascular or biliary complications. From January 1, 1999 to October 1, 2005, we studied 138 liver transplants in 121 children: 16 (13.2%) received an ABO incompatible liver allograft. One-year actuarial patient survival for ABO-matched grafts vs. ABO-I grafts was 93.0% and 100%, respectively, whereas graft survival was 83.4% and 92.3%. Additionally, 6 of 16 (37.5%) ABO-I transplanted children had 8 rejection episodes, whereas 47 patients (44.8%) had 121 rejection episodes in the ABO-compatible group. There were no vascular complications and 2 biliary strictures in the ABO-I group. Plasmapheresis was not used for pretransplantation desensitization and was only required in 1 posttransplantation recipient. No child was splenectomized. Six of the 16 children were older than 13 yr of age, suggesting the possibility of successfully expanding this technique to an older population. In conclusion, our outcomes may support the concept of using ABO-I grafts in a more elective setting associated with split and living donor liver transplants. Liver Transpl 12:972-978, 2006.

No abstract