Background: Graft-versus-host disease following liver transplantation is a serious and usually fatal complication. Data identifying the risk factors and specifying the diagnosis and treatment options of the disease are scarce and contentious. Moreover, recommendations for therapeutic approaches are similarly sparse.Methods: A systematic review of the literature from 1988 to 2020 on graft-versus-host disease following liver transplantation was performed using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases. Medical subject headings, such as graft-versus-host disease and GvHD were used in combination with solid organ transplant, transplantation, or liver transplant. Following duplicate removal, 9298 articles were screened for suitability. A total of 238 full-text articles were analyzed for eligibility, resulting in 130 eligible articles for meta-analysis. Two hundred twenty-five patients developing graft-versus-host disease following liver transplantation reported herein were mainly published in case reports and case series.Results: Graft-versus-host disease occurred with an incidence of 1.2%. 85% developed following deceased donor liver transplant and 15% following living-related donor liver transplantation. The median follow-up period following liver transplantation was 84 days (interquartile range, 45–180). The median time from liver transplantation to graft-versus-host disease onset was 30 days (interquartile range, 21–42). The main clinical features included skin rash (59%), fever (43%), diarrhea (36%), and pancytopenia (30%). The overall mortality rate was 71%. Neither univariate (HR = 0.999; 95% CI, 0.493–2.023;p= 1.0) nor multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between adaptation of immunosuppression and survival probability (HR = 1.475; 95% CI, 0.659–3.303;p= 0.3).Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that an increase in immunosuppressive regimen does not yield any survival benefit in patients suffering from graft-versus-host disease following liver transplantation.

In liver transplantation, older donor age is a well-known risk factor for dismal outcomes, especially due to the high susceptibility of older grafts to ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, whether the factors correlating with impaired graft and patient survival following the transplantation of older grafts follow a linear trend among elderly donors remains elusive. In this study, liver transplantations between January 2006 and May 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Ninety-two recipients of grafts from donors ≥65 years were identified and divided into two groups: (1) ≥65–69 and (2) ≥ 70 years. One-year patient survival was comparable between recipients of grafts from donors ≥65–69 and ≥70 years (78.9% and 70.0%). One-year graft survival was 73.1% (donor ≥65–69) and 62.5% (donor ≥ 70), while multivariate analysis revealed superior one-year graft survival to be associated with a donor age of ≥65–69. No statistically significant differences were found for rates of primary non-function. The influence of donor age on graft and patient survival appears not to have a distinct impact on dismal outcomes in the range of 65–70 years. The impact of old donor age needs to be balanced with other risk factors, as these donors provide grafts that offer a lifesaving graft function.

Kidney allografts are subjected to ischemia reperfusion injury during the process of transplantation. Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) of deceased donor kidneys from organ procurement until transplantation is associated with a superior outcome when compared to static cold storage (SCS). Nevertheless, cold ischemia time (CIT) remains an independent risk factor for delayed graft function (DGF) in HMP-preserved kidney allografts as well. We performed a retrospective single-center study including all adult recipients who underwent deceased donor kidney-only transplantation at our center between January 2019 and December 2020. Beside the clinicopathological donor and recipient data, flow and resistance data during HMP were assessed. Short- and long-term kidney allograft outcome after end-ischemic HMP and SCS were analyzed and compared. Organ preservation consisted of either SCS (n = 88) or HMP (n = 45). There were no differences in recipient demographics and donor details between groups. CIT was significantly longer in the HMP group (16.5 [8.5–28.5] vs. 11.3 [5.4–24.1], p < 0.0001). The incidence of DGF as well as serum creatinine at discharge and at 1 year post transplant were comparable between groups. Duration of SCS prior to HMP was comparable among grafts with and without DGF. Flow rate and organ resistance at the start of HMP were significantly worse in DGF-kidney grafts (arterial flow 22.50 [18.00–48.00] vs. 51.83 [25.50–92.67] ml/min, p = 0.0256; organ resistance 123.33 [57.67–165.50] vs. 51.33 [28.17–111.50] mmHg/mL/min, p = 0.0050). Recipients with DGF had significantly worse creatinine levels at discharge (2.54 [1.08–7.64] vs. 1.67 [0.90–6.56], p < 0.0001) and at 1 year post transplant (1.80 [1.09–7.95] vs. 1.59 [0.87–7.40], p = 0.0105). In conclusion, baseline HMP parameters could be applied as a predictive tool for initial graft function, which in turn determines long-term outcome.

The aim of our study was to evaluate hyperspectral imaging (HSI) as a rapid, non-ionizing technique for the assessment of organ quality and the prediction of delayed graft function (DGF) in kidney transplantation after static cold storage (SCS, n = 20), as well as hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP, n = 18). HSI assessment of the kidney parenchyma was performed during organ preservation and at 10 and 30 min after reperfusion using the TIVITA^® Tissue System (Diaspective Vision GmbH, Am Salzhaff, Germany), calculating oxygen saturation (StO₂), near-infrared perfusion index (NIR), tissue haemoglobin index (THI), and tissue water index (TWI). Recipient and donor characteristics were comparable between organ preservation groups. Cold ischemic time was significantly longer in the HMP group (14.1 h [3.6–23.1] vs. 8.7h [2.2–17.0], p = 0.002). The overall presence of DGF was comparable between groups (HMP group n = 10 (55.6%), SCS group n = 10 (50.0%)). Prediction of DGF was possible in SCS and HMP kidneys; StO₂ at 10 (50.00 [17.75–76.25] vs. 63.17 [27.00–77.75]%, p = 0.0467) and 30 min (57.63 [18.25–78.25] vs. 65.38 [21.25–83.33]%, p = 0.0323) after reperfusion, as well as NIR at 10 (41.75 [1.0–58.00] vs. 48.63 [12.25–69.50], p = 0.0137) and 30 min (49.63 [8.50–66.75] vs. 55.80 [14.75–73.25], p = 0.0261) after reperfusion were significantly lower in DGF kidneys, independent of the organ preservation method. In conclusion, HSI is a reliable method for intraoperative assessment of renal microperfusion, applicable after organ preservation through SCS and HMP, and predicts the development of DGF.

Introduction: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is by far the leading malignant indication for liver transplantation (LT). Few other malignancies, including cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC), metastases from neuroendocrine tumors (NET), and sarcomas of the liver (LSAR), also are commonly accepted indications for LT. However, there is limited information on their outcome after LT.Methods: Graft and patient survival in 14,623 LTs performed in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, CCC, NET, and LSAR from 1988 to 2017 and reported to the Collaborative Transplant Study were analyzed.Results: The study group consisted of 13,862 patients who had HCC (94.8%), 498 (3.4%) who had CCC, 100 (0.7%) who had NET, and 163 (1.1%) who had LSAR. CCC patients showed a 5-year graft survival rate of 32.1%, strikingly lower than the 63.2% rate in HCC, 51.6% rate in NET, and 64.5% rate in LSAR patients (P < 0.001 for all vs. CCC). Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of graft loss and death due to cancer during the first five post-transplant years in CCC vs. HCC patients (HR 1.77 and 2.56; P < 0.001 for both). The same risks were increased also in NET and LSAR patients but did not reach statistical significance.Conclusion: Among patients with rare malignant indications for LT, CCC patients showed significantly impaired graft as well as patient survival compared to HCC patients. The observed differences might challenge traditional decision-making processes for LT indication and palliative treatment in specific hepatic malignancies.

Objective: To report real-world data on hypothermic oxygenated perfusion (HOPE) and normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) in liver transplantation (LT). Summary Background Data: Real-world comparisons between HOPE and NMP are limited and methodologically challenging due to heterogeneity in donor and recipient risk profiles and regional differences in practice patterns. Methods: This international cohort study analyzed consecutive NMP-preserved LTs performed at 15 predominantly North American centers between 2021 and 2025. Outcomes were compared with the European HOPE-REAL cohort, comprising HOPE-treated LTs from 22 centers between 2012 and 2021. Risk-adjusted analyses were performed, stratified by graft type and risk category. Imbalances in baseline characteristics were addressed using entropy balancing. Results: A total of 954 NMP-treated and 1202 HOPE-treated grafts were analyzed, revealing substantial differences in donor risk. Extended-criteria DBD grafts accounted for 30% versus 64%, and futile DCD grafts for 10% versus 30%, in the NMP and HOPE cohorts, respectively. In the NMP cohort, death-censored graft survival at 1, 2, and 3 years exceeded 96% for DBD grafts and 94% for DCD grafts. Comparable outcomes were observed in the HOPE cohort, with 93% survival in DBD and 87% in DCD grafts at up to 3 years, despite significantly higher donor risk in the HOPE-DCD cohort. After risk adjustment, death-censored graft survival remained similar between both modalities across graft types and risk categories. Conclusions: Real-world data on HOPE-treated and NMP-treated LT demonstrate excellent outcomes. Nevertheless, compared with HOPE, further high-quality evidence and longer preservation time is needed to substantiate the clinical benefits of NMP in high-risk grafts.