The Liver Donor Risk Index (LDRI) was developed by Feng et. al. to predict the quality of donor liver allografts. However, there is currently no literature documenting the application and efficacy of Feng’s LDRI specifically for the pediatric population. The goal of our study is to apply Feng’s LDRI to our study population as well as develop a pediatric-specific LDRI. De-identified data from the United Network for Organ Sharing for 7,836 pediatric transplant recipients, was retrospectively analyzed from January 1, 2000, to July 1, 2022. We performed a univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis to determine the significant recipient and transplant factors impacting pediatric liver allograft survival. These significant factors were used to construct the pediatric-specific LDRI index. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was utilized to compare the pediatric-specific and Feng LDRI indexes at 1, 5, and 10 years.​​ Our pediatric-specific LDRI includes 4 variables found to be significant in pediatric populations: donor age: 35-50, ≥ 50; cold ischemia time ≤ 6, AST level >1000. In addition, our pediatric-specific LDRI had a higher ROC c-statistic compared to Feng’s LDRI at 1 year (0.57 vs. 0.55), 5 years (0.57 vs. 0.50), and 10 years (0.58 vs. 0.47). Our findings indicate that there is a need to create a pediatric-specific LDRI as the Feng LDRI has not been shown to be efficacious in pediatric populations. Our index may serve as a starting point for the development of a comprehensive pediatric LDRI.

Background/Objectives: There is a critical disparity between donor organs and recipients awaiting liver transplantation. Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) has emerged as a promising strategy with which to address this shortage. This study aimed to evaluate the association between NMP and short-term outcomes following liver transplantation using a large, multivariable-adjusted national dataset. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the de-identified United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was conducted for adult liver transplant recipients between January 2020 and July 2024. Standard and deceased donor data were merged according to donor identification number. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression models were used to evaluate patient mortality, graft failure, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Results: Among 34,115 patients, adjusted regression demonstrated lower one-year patient mortality (OR 0.68, CI 0.54–0.86, p = 0.001) and graft failure (OR 0.72, CI 0.60–0.87, p = 0.001) with NMP compared to static cold storage. NMP was also associated with reduced 30-day (OR 0.67, CI 0.47–0.95, p = 0.03) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.72, CI 0.54–0.94, p = 0.02) and shorter LOS (HR 1.06, CI 1.01–1.12, p = 0.02). Kaplan–Meier and Cox analyses showed no significant differences in overall patient mortality or graft failure. Conclusions: NMP was associated with improved short-term survival in time-independent analysis; however, it failed to reach significance in time-dependent Cox regression. These findings suggest that NMP could play a role in improving short-term outcomes and expanding the donor pool for liver transplant candidates. Additional studies are needed to fully elucidate the impact of NMP on short-term survival outcomes.

Background: Patients with high-acuity liver failure have increased access to marginal and split liver options, owing to historically high waitlist mortality rates. While most research states that donor liver quality has no impact on patients with high-acuity illness, there have been inconsistencies in recent research on how liver quality impacts post-transplant outcomes for these patients. We aimed to quantify donor liver quality with various post-transplantation patient outcomes for patients with high-acuity illness.Material/Methods: Using the liver donor risk index (LDRI), model for end stage liver disease (MELD), and clinically relevant recipient factors, we used multivariate logistic regression to analyze how donor liver quality affects varying measures of patient outcomes for 9923 high-acuity patients from June 18, 2013, to June 18, 2022. Results: Using LDRI, high-quality livers had a significant protective impact on high-acuity patient mortality, compared with low-quality livers (OR=0.695 [0.549, 0.879], P=0.002). High-quality livers also had significant impact on graft survival (OR=0.706 [0.558, 0.894], P=0.004). Two sensitivity patient mortality analyses, excluding patients with status 1A and hepatocellular carcinoma, showed significant protective findings for high-quality livers. Highquality livers had insignificant outcomes on long-term survivor mortality, length of hospitalization, and primary non-function outcomes, compared with low-quality donor livers.Conclusions: While our findings suggest donor quality has an impact on high-acuity patient outcomes, these findings indicate further research is needed in intent-to-treat analysis on clinical offer data to provide a clearer finding of how donor quality affects patients with high-acuity illness.