Developing Prediction Models for Allograft Failure After Liver Transplantation
NCT ID: NCT05289609
Last Updated: 2022-03-21
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
UNKNOWN
Total Enrollment
5000 participants
Study Classification
OBSERVATIONAL
Study Start Date
2022-04-01
Study Completion Date
2024-04-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Prompt identification of allograft failure (AF) is highly desirable to address patients to liver retransplantation, in order to maximize results and preserve patients safety.
Recently, sophisticated kinetic models became available, offering the possibility to predict 90-day AF with unprecedented accuracy, by computing data from the first 10 days after liver transplant (LT).
The growing utilization of extended criteria and cardiac death donors stimulates the transplant community to further refine such predictive models and validate them on a larger scale population of patients across the nations.
This study aims to develop new algorithms for the timely prediction of AF at 90 and 365 days using a prospective international cohort from high-volume centers, to validate them on a large retrospective cohort, to identify the best time for retransplantation, to stratify the risk of AF according to the graft type (i.e. DBD, ECD, DCD, LD), to weigh the effect of risk-mitigation strategies, and to assess the correlation with post-LT morbidity and mortality.
Recently, sophisticated kinetic models became available, offering the possibility to predict 90-day AF with unprecedented accuracy, by computing data from the first 10 days after liver transplant (LT).
The growing utilization of extended criteria and cardiac death donors stimulates the transplant community to further refine such predictive models and validate them on a larger scale population of patients across the nations.
This study aims to develop new algorithms for the timely prediction of AF at 90 and 365 days using a prospective international cohort from high-volume centers, to validate them on a large retrospective cohort, to identify the best time for retransplantation, to stratify the risk of AF according to the graft type (i.e. DBD, ECD, DCD, LD), to weigh the effect of risk-mitigation strategies, and to assess the correlation with post-LT morbidity and mortality.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Tumor Characteristics, Pre-transplant Treatments and Immunosuppression After Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
NCT02995096
Liver Transplantation
COMPLETED
The Study of Long-term Deterioration of Kidney Transplants.
NCT00217126
Kidney Transplant
COMPLETED
Single-center Prospective Study of Non-invasive Methods for the Diagnosis of Postoperative Complications in Liver Transplant Recipients
NCT05793203
Rejection Acute Hepatic
Transplant; Failure, Liver
Liver Dysfunction
RECRUITING
Prospective Evaluation of Predictors for Organ Failure Following Liver Transplantation
NCT00408889
Liver Transplantation
COMPLETED
Serum GLYcomics to Predict Graft Loss and Mortality After Liver Transplantation
NCT05866796
Liver Transplant Failure
Prognostic Biomarkers
RECRUITING
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Background. During the last decade, the expansion of the donor pool by using extended criteria donors (ECD) grafts and those after cardiac death (DCD) have redrawn the attention around allograft failure (AF) due to ischemia-reperfusion injury after liver transplantation. The prompt diagnosis of AF is of paramount importance to define the indication for early re-transplantation. Moreover, the grafts from ECD and DCD not only may develop AF during the initial 90 days (early allograft failure, EAF) but also a slow-evolving type of failure, which presents up until 365 days.
The evaluation times and the modalities to promptly identify AF are still the object of research. At the same time, no consensus exists on the most accurate predictors of AF and on the possible mitigation strategies. In addition, ECD and DCD grafts are burdened by a higher incidence of ischemic cholangiopathy, that typically develops after 6 to 12 months, which is also a cause of AF and need for retransplant.
Two scores, one developed in the United States at University of California Los Angeles (L-GrAFT) and one in Italy on a multicentric basis (EASE), allow the prediction of EAF with excellent C-statistics. Both were validated on multicentric external populations. L-GrAFT and EASE scores are calculated at day 10 after LT; a modification of the L-GrAFT score at day 7 has been developed and validated. Both scores are also proposed for quantifying the degree of graft recovery in translational studies. However, the prognostic role of pre-transplant histopathology of the graft as well as the detailed characterization of the dynamics that make retransplant sustainable or contraindicated and the possibilities to intervene to mitigate the graft-related risk remain unmet needs. Finally, the differences among phenotypic patterns of various transplant types (DBD, deceased donor grafts after cardiac death \[DCD\] and living donor grafts \[LD\]) have not been investigated, nor a large prospective study has been undertaken.
Rationale. Timely prediction of AF is pivotal to identify patients potentially benefiting from a rescue retransplant before severe complications develop. When massive cytolysis and clear signs of liver failure occur within the first 2-4 days after LT, the indication for a retransplant is clear, independently from the evidence of hepatic vessels thrombosis. Nevertheless, past 5 to 10 days after transplant, the decision whether or not to retransplant is often challenging. AF results from a complex interplay between donor, procurement-related, and recipient perioperative factors. All of them contribute to determine the severity and the capability to recover from the ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, several conditions and/or postoperative events may precipitate such capability (e.g., pre-operative cardiac ischemic damage, frailty-sarcopenia, graft rejection, drug toxicity, kidney failure, or severe infections or sepsis). Only a part of these factors have been studied. Additionally, although L-GrAFT and EASE scores can predict AF after 7 to 10 days, the trajectories of the graft towards recovery, successful or unsuccessful retransplantation and death without retransplant, have not been fully characterized yet. Despite the excellent accuracy and the efficacious discrimination ability, the existing studies have not elucidated the individual role of these events, nor competitive models have been developed in the perspective of retransplantation. Notably, literature is exclusively based on retrospective studies. Almost all these studies span an extended period of time, are often monocentric, do not consider the center volume effect, and are not balanced in the number of recruited patients in each center. Finally, only a small number of DCD grafts and ECD grafts managed by perfusion machines have been included in previous studies.
Study objectives:
* Primary to develop new algorithms for the timely prediction of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days using a comprehensive prospectively collected dataset based on the current clinical practice of high-volume centers.
* Secondary to validate the already existing predictive models and the newly developed algorithms on a retrospective cohort of patients from low to medium-volume transplant centers; to develop a novel time-based dynamic algorithm, with increasing accuracy from the 3rd to 7th post-operative day; to identify the best-time for re-transplant (after stratification according to the post-operative weeks, months, trimesters); to investigate differences in the incidence of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days according to DBD, DCD, LD donor grafts; to evaluate the effect of mitigation strategies on the precipitating factors of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days; to investigate the association of kinetic algorithms with development of post-LT complications (acute kidney injury, ischemic cholangiopathy, other complications); to identify risk factors for mortality that may contraindicate re-transplant.
Study design. Multicenter, international, non-competitive, observational two-cohort study. The two cohorts include a first cohort with prospective patient enrolment and a second cohort with retrospective enrolment.
A steering committee was constituted to design the study. Members were identified according to their experience on the topic and paying attention to their geographic area (Europe, Americas, Asia). The list of the Institution of all the steering committee members is included above. A draft of the preliminary study design and subsequent questionnaires on controversial issues were circulated among members.
No modification to the participating centers standard practice for the management of LT donors and recipients is required. The study has been structured according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.
Setting. The study will be conducted in 80 liver transplant centers from four continents (the final list of participating centers will be published as soon as all centers have confirmed and are ready to enroll).
Two distinct datasets will be created to collect data from the participating centers, depending on which of the two cohorts their patients belong to.
* Prospective cohort.
* Retrospective cohort. The study design includes two evaluation times (at 90 and 365 days after LT). Participants will be followed-up during their post-transplant hospital stay and at the liver transplant outpatient clinic after discharge from hospital. Readmissions to the hospital for any cause will be recorded.
Variables.
Main variable categories are:
* identification data (ID)
* donor characteristics data
* pre-operative data
* graft histology data
* intraoperative data
* post-operative data
* follow-up data
Data will be entered on the electronic Case Report Form (eCRF). The eCRF has been developed using the REDCap ver 10.0.21 software hosted at https://redcap-irccs.policlinicogemelli.it/, which includes ten forms:
1. ID data (LT progressive number, first 4 letter of the surname, LT date, LT type)
2. Donor data (standard parameters)
3. Biopsy data (central revision of uploaded scanned slides)
4. Pre-operative evaluation of the recipient (standard parameters)
5. Pre-operative quantification of Sarcopenia (central revision of uploaded CT scan)
6. Intra-operative data (surgical and anesthetics parameters)
7. Post-operative data (day 1-10)
8. Surgical complications data (paying attention to infections and contraindications to Re-Transplant)
9. End Point Indicators of graft function (CT scan, MR)
10. Outcome data at 90 and 365 days (ICU LoS, Hospital Los, Graft Survival, Causes of Graft Loss, Patient Survival) The eCRF allows easy calculation of scores including L-GrAFT and EASE scores.
The REDCAP software will automatically perform de-identification and encryption of the data.
The retrospective cohort dataset will include 75 variables, previously registered in the local-center data sources. They will be used to validate previously published kinetic algorithms.
Qualitative variables. Histology obtained during the back-table graft preparation, or alternatively at any time before graft implantation, will constitute a key point although not mandatory condition for the enrolment. The histology slides will be scanned at the local centers, de-identified and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes.Transplant candidates CT scan (DICOM files only) from the pre-listing work-up will be de-identified and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes. The incidence and grade of ischemic cholangiopathy will be measured by means of a cholangio-magnetic resonance (MR) at 10-12 months after LT (on-demand, based on clinical suspicion of ischemic cholangiopathy, e.g., higher than two-fold increase in baseline alkaline phosphatase levels). The DICOM files will be anonymized and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes.
Quantitative variables. Quantitative variables will be first explored by missing analysis at three levels: at a center level; at a country level; at continental level. Then, they will be assessed by descriptive analysis in the overall population and according to three main graft types. Donor characteristics, pre-operative, intraoperative, graft histology, and post-operative outcome-data will be assessed as potential predictors of the main outcome, i.e., allograft survival, as well as of patient survival at 90 and 365 days. The above-mentioned data will also be implemented in algorithms to chose the best time-window within which undergo re-transplant. Impact of donor age, graft percentage of macro-steatosis, Donor Warm Ischemia Time, Donor Asystolic Warm Ischemia Time, Recipient Warm Ischemia Time, Cold Ischemia Time, incidence of post-reperfusion syndrome, length of stay (LoS) in hospital and incidence of vascular thrombosis and of biliary complications (anastomotic and non-anastomotic) will be evaluated paying attention to the graft type.
The evaluation times and the modalities to promptly identify AF are still the object of research. At the same time, no consensus exists on the most accurate predictors of AF and on the possible mitigation strategies. In addition, ECD and DCD grafts are burdened by a higher incidence of ischemic cholangiopathy, that typically develops after 6 to 12 months, which is also a cause of AF and need for retransplant.
Two scores, one developed in the United States at University of California Los Angeles (L-GrAFT) and one in Italy on a multicentric basis (EASE), allow the prediction of EAF with excellent C-statistics. Both were validated on multicentric external populations. L-GrAFT and EASE scores are calculated at day 10 after LT; a modification of the L-GrAFT score at day 7 has been developed and validated. Both scores are also proposed for quantifying the degree of graft recovery in translational studies. However, the prognostic role of pre-transplant histopathology of the graft as well as the detailed characterization of the dynamics that make retransplant sustainable or contraindicated and the possibilities to intervene to mitigate the graft-related risk remain unmet needs. Finally, the differences among phenotypic patterns of various transplant types (DBD, deceased donor grafts after cardiac death \[DCD\] and living donor grafts \[LD\]) have not been investigated, nor a large prospective study has been undertaken.
Rationale. Timely prediction of AF is pivotal to identify patients potentially benefiting from a rescue retransplant before severe complications develop. When massive cytolysis and clear signs of liver failure occur within the first 2-4 days after LT, the indication for a retransplant is clear, independently from the evidence of hepatic vessels thrombosis. Nevertheless, past 5 to 10 days after transplant, the decision whether or not to retransplant is often challenging. AF results from a complex interplay between donor, procurement-related, and recipient perioperative factors. All of them contribute to determine the severity and the capability to recover from the ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, several conditions and/or postoperative events may precipitate such capability (e.g., pre-operative cardiac ischemic damage, frailty-sarcopenia, graft rejection, drug toxicity, kidney failure, or severe infections or sepsis). Only a part of these factors have been studied. Additionally, although L-GrAFT and EASE scores can predict AF after 7 to 10 days, the trajectories of the graft towards recovery, successful or unsuccessful retransplantation and death without retransplant, have not been fully characterized yet. Despite the excellent accuracy and the efficacious discrimination ability, the existing studies have not elucidated the individual role of these events, nor competitive models have been developed in the perspective of retransplantation. Notably, literature is exclusively based on retrospective studies. Almost all these studies span an extended period of time, are often monocentric, do not consider the center volume effect, and are not balanced in the number of recruited patients in each center. Finally, only a small number of DCD grafts and ECD grafts managed by perfusion machines have been included in previous studies.
Study objectives:
* Primary to develop new algorithms for the timely prediction of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days using a comprehensive prospectively collected dataset based on the current clinical practice of high-volume centers.
* Secondary to validate the already existing predictive models and the newly developed algorithms on a retrospective cohort of patients from low to medium-volume transplant centers; to develop a novel time-based dynamic algorithm, with increasing accuracy from the 3rd to 7th post-operative day; to identify the best-time for re-transplant (after stratification according to the post-operative weeks, months, trimesters); to investigate differences in the incidence of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days according to DBD, DCD, LD donor grafts; to evaluate the effect of mitigation strategies on the precipitating factors of Allograft Failure at 90 and 365 days; to investigate the association of kinetic algorithms with development of post-LT complications (acute kidney injury, ischemic cholangiopathy, other complications); to identify risk factors for mortality that may contraindicate re-transplant.
Study design. Multicenter, international, non-competitive, observational two-cohort study. The two cohorts include a first cohort with prospective patient enrolment and a second cohort with retrospective enrolment.
A steering committee was constituted to design the study. Members were identified according to their experience on the topic and paying attention to their geographic area (Europe, Americas, Asia). The list of the Institution of all the steering committee members is included above. A draft of the preliminary study design and subsequent questionnaires on controversial issues were circulated among members.
No modification to the participating centers standard practice for the management of LT donors and recipients is required. The study has been structured according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.
Setting. The study will be conducted in 80 liver transplant centers from four continents (the final list of participating centers will be published as soon as all centers have confirmed and are ready to enroll).
Two distinct datasets will be created to collect data from the participating centers, depending on which of the two cohorts their patients belong to.
* Prospective cohort.
* Retrospective cohort. The study design includes two evaluation times (at 90 and 365 days after LT). Participants will be followed-up during their post-transplant hospital stay and at the liver transplant outpatient clinic after discharge from hospital. Readmissions to the hospital for any cause will be recorded.
Variables.
Main variable categories are:
* identification data (ID)
* donor characteristics data
* pre-operative data
* graft histology data
* intraoperative data
* post-operative data
* follow-up data
Data will be entered on the electronic Case Report Form (eCRF). The eCRF has been developed using the REDCap ver 10.0.21 software hosted at https://redcap-irccs.policlinicogemelli.it/, which includes ten forms:
1. ID data (LT progressive number, first 4 letter of the surname, LT date, LT type)
2. Donor data (standard parameters)
3. Biopsy data (central revision of uploaded scanned slides)
4. Pre-operative evaluation of the recipient (standard parameters)
5. Pre-operative quantification of Sarcopenia (central revision of uploaded CT scan)
6. Intra-operative data (surgical and anesthetics parameters)
7. Post-operative data (day 1-10)
8. Surgical complications data (paying attention to infections and contraindications to Re-Transplant)
9. End Point Indicators of graft function (CT scan, MR)
10. Outcome data at 90 and 365 days (ICU LoS, Hospital Los, Graft Survival, Causes of Graft Loss, Patient Survival) The eCRF allows easy calculation of scores including L-GrAFT and EASE scores.
The REDCAP software will automatically perform de-identification and encryption of the data.
The retrospective cohort dataset will include 75 variables, previously registered in the local-center data sources. They will be used to validate previously published kinetic algorithms.
Qualitative variables. Histology obtained during the back-table graft preparation, or alternatively at any time before graft implantation, will constitute a key point although not mandatory condition for the enrolment. The histology slides will be scanned at the local centers, de-identified and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes.Transplant candidates CT scan (DICOM files only) from the pre-listing work-up will be de-identified and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes. The incidence and grade of ischemic cholangiopathy will be measured by means of a cholangio-magnetic resonance (MR) at 10-12 months after LT (on-demand, based on clinical suspicion of ischemic cholangiopathy, e.g., higher than two-fold increase in baseline alkaline phosphatase levels). The DICOM files will be anonymized and uploaded on the eCRF and centrally read for research purposes.
Quantitative variables. Quantitative variables will be first explored by missing analysis at three levels: at a center level; at a country level; at continental level. Then, they will be assessed by descriptive analysis in the overall population and according to three main graft types. Donor characteristics, pre-operative, intraoperative, graft histology, and post-operative outcome-data will be assessed as potential predictors of the main outcome, i.e., allograft survival, as well as of patient survival at 90 and 365 days. The above-mentioned data will also be implemented in algorithms to chose the best time-window within which undergo re-transplant. Impact of donor age, graft percentage of macro-steatosis, Donor Warm Ischemia Time, Donor Asystolic Warm Ischemia Time, Recipient Warm Ischemia Time, Cold Ischemia Time, incidence of post-reperfusion syndrome, length of stay (LoS) in hospital and incidence of vascular thrombosis and of biliary complications (anastomotic and non-anastomotic) will be evaluated paying attention to the graft type.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Liver Transplant Disorder
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Observational Model Type
COHORT
Study Time Perspective
OTHER
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Prospective Cohort
Liver Transplant Recipients from High-volume centers (i.e., performing \>= 65 LTs per year)
Liver Transplantation
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Individuals with end-stage liver disease will be subjected to liver transplantation from deceased or living donors
Retrospective Cohort
Liver Transplant Recipients from Low-to-medium volume centers (i.e., performing \<65 LTs per year) and High-volume centers
Liver Transplantation
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Individuals with end-stage liver disease will be subjected to liver transplantation from deceased or living donors
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Liver Transplantation
Individuals with end-stage liver disease will be subjected to liver transplantation from deceased or living donors
Intervention Type
PROCEDURE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
1. Adult recipients (≥18 years)
2. First transplant (retransplant cases should be enrolled if the first transplant is part of the study)
3. DBD grafts
4. DCD grafts (controlled and uncontrolled)
5. DBD and DCD grafts managed by perfusion machines
6. Living donor grafts (both left lobe and right lobe grafts) transplanted into adult recipients.
7. Split liver grafts (both left lobe and right lobe grafts) transplanted into adult recipients.
2. First transplant (retransplant cases should be enrolled if the first transplant is part of the study)
3. DBD grafts
4. DCD grafts (controlled and uncontrolled)
5. DBD and DCD grafts managed by perfusion machines
6. Living donor grafts (both left lobe and right lobe grafts) transplanted into adult recipients.
7. Split liver grafts (both left lobe and right lobe grafts) transplanted into adult recipients.
Exclusion Criteria
1. Combined grafts (e.g., liver-kidney, liver-heart, liver-pancreas, multi-visceral grafts)
2. Domino grafts
3. Heterotopic grafts
4. Double grafts
5. Recipients undergoing liver transplants for cholangiocarcinoma and colorectal liver metastases
2. Domino grafts
3. Heterotopic grafts
4. Double grafts
5. Recipients undergoing liver transplants for cholangiocarcinoma and colorectal liver metastases
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of California, Los Angeles
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
University Hospital Padova
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Mayo Clinic
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Tokyo Women's Medical University
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Hospital Universitario La Paz
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
University of Roma La Sapienza
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
The Cleveland Clinic
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Dr. Rela Institute & Medical Centre
UNKNOWN
Sponsor Role
collaborator
University of Toronto
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Universidade Federal do ParanĂ¡
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Erasmus Medical Center
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Prof. Alfonso Avolio
Professor
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Vatche Agopian
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of California, Los Angeles
Alfonso W Avolio
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Fondazione Policlinico universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Dumont-UCLA Transplant and Liver Cancer Centers, Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Los Angeles, California, United States
Site Status
Department of Transplant, Mayo Clinic Florida
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Site Status
Division of Organ Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Massachusetts Memorial Hospital, University of Massachusetts
Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
Site Status
Transplantation Center, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic
Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Site Status
Division of Hepato Pancreatic Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Department of General Surgery, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires
Buenos Aires, , Argentina
Site Status
Liver Transplant Division, Santa Isabel Hospital
Blumenau, , Brazil
Site Status
Multi-Organ Transplant and HPB Surgical Oncology, Division of General Surgery, University Health Network
Toronto, , Canada
Site Status
First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University
Guangzhou, , China
Site Status
Dr Rela Institute and Medical Centre
Chennai, , India
Site Status
Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, Padova University Hospital
Padua, , Italy
Site Status
Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, Padova University Hospital
Padua, , Italy
Site Status
General Surgery and Organ Transplantation Unit, Sapienza University of Rome
Roma, , Italy
Site Status
Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS
Roma, , Italy
Site Status
GSTeP - Gemelli Science and Technology Park, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS
Roma, , Italy
Site Status
Department of Surgery, Tokyo Women's Medical University
Shinjuku-Ku, , Japan
Site Status
Erasmus MC Transplant Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Surgery, Division of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery
Rotterdam, , Netherlands
Site Status
Cirugia General y del A. Digestivo, Hospital Universitario La Paz
Madrid, , Spain
Site Status
Department of Transplant Surgery, Edinburgh Transplant Centre, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
Edinburgh, , United Kingdom
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
United States
Argentina
Brazil
Canada
China
India
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
Spain
United Kingdom
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Agopian VG, Harlander-Locke MP, Markovic D, Dumronggittigule W, Xia V, Kaldas FM, Zarrinpar A, Yersiz H, Farmer DG, Hiatt JR, Busuttil RW. Evaluation of Early Allograft Function Using the Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplantation Risk Score Model. JAMA Surg. 2018 May 1;153(5):436-444. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.5040.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Agopian VG, Markovic D, Klintmalm GB, Saracino G, Chapman WC, Vachharajani N, Florman SS, Tabrizian P, Haydel B, Nasralla D, Friend PJ, Boteon YL, Ploeg R, Harlander-Locke MP, Xia V, DiNorcia J, Kaldas FM, Yersiz H, Farmer DG, Busuttil RW. Multicenter validation of the liver graft assessment following transplantation (L-GrAFT) score for assessment of early allograft dysfunction. J Hepatol. 2021 Apr;74(4):881-892. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.09.015. Epub 2020 Sep 23.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Avolio AW, Franco A, Schlegel A, Lai Q, Meli S, Burra P, Patrono D, Ravaioli M, Bassi D, Ferla F, Pagano D, Violi P, Camagni S, Dondossola D, Montalti R, Alrawashdeh W, Vitale A, Teofili L, Spoletini G, Magistri P, Bongini M, Rossi M, Mazzaferro V, Di Benedetto F, Hammond J, Vivarelli M, Agnes S, Colledan M, Carraro A, Cescon M, De Carlis L, Caccamo L, Gruttadauria S, Muiesan P, Cillo U, Romagnoli R, De Simone P. Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Model to Estimate Early Allograft Failure Among Patients Requiring Early Liver Retransplant. JAMA Surg. 2020 Dec 1;155(12):e204095. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.4095. Epub 2020 Dec 16.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Avolio AW, Lai Q, Cillo U, Romagnoli R, De Simone P. L-GrAFT and EASE scores in liver transplantation: Need for reciprocal external validation and comparison with other scores. J Hepatol. 2021 Sep;75(3):729-731. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.12.009. Epub 2020 Dec 17. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Avolio AW, Contegiacomo A, Spoletini G, Moschetta G, Bianco G, Agnes S, Melcher ML, Burra P. Toward a novel evidence-based definition of early allograft failure in the perspective of liver retransplant. Transpl Int. 2021 Dec;34(12):2905-2907. doi: 10.1111/tri.14162. Epub 2021 Dec 6. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Croome KP, Mathur AK, Aqel B, Yang L, Taner T, Heimbach JK, Rosen CB, Paz-Fumagalli R, Taner CB. Classification of Distinct Patterns of Ischemic Cholangiopathy Following DCD Liver Transplantation: Distinct Clinical Courses and Long-term Outcomes From a Multicenter Cohort. Transplantation. 2022 Jun 1;106(6):1206-1214. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003928. Epub 2022 Aug 30.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Chen S, Wang T, Luo T, He S, Huang C, Jia Z, Zhan L, Wang D, Zhu X, Guo Z, He X. Prediction of Graft Survival Post-liver Transplantation by L-GrAFT Risk Score Model, EASE Score, MEAF Scoring, and EAD. Front Surg. 2021 Nov 19;8:753056. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.753056. eCollection 2021.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Lai Q, Magistri P, Lionetti R, Avolio AW, Lenci I, Giannelli V, Pecchi A, Ferri F, Marrone G, Angelico M, Milana M, Schinnina V, Menozzi R, Di Martino M, Grieco A, Manzia TM, Tisone G, Agnes S, Rossi M, Di Benedetto F, Ettorre GM; Sarco-Model Study Group. Sarco-Model: A score to predict the dropout risk in the perspective of organ allocation in patients awaiting liver transplantation. Liver Int. 2021 Jul;41(7):1629-1640. doi: 10.1111/liv.14889. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Martins PN, Rizzari MD, Ghinolfi D, Jochmans I, Attia M, Jalan R, Friend PJ; ILTS Special Interest Group "DCD, Preservation and Machine Perfusion". Design, Analysis, and Pitfalls of Clinical Trials Using Ex Situ Liver Machine Perfusion: The International Liver Transplantation Society Consensus Guidelines. Transplantation. 2021 Apr 1;105(4):796-815. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003573.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pareja E, Cortes M, Hervas D, Mir J, Valdivieso A, Castell JV, Lahoz A. A score model for the continuous grading of early allograft dysfunction severity. Liver Transpl. 2015 Jan;21(1):38-46. doi: 10.1002/lt.23990. Epub 2014 Nov 24.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Olthoff KM, Kulik L, Samstein B, Kaminski M, Abecassis M, Emond J, Shaked A, Christie JD. Validation of a current definition of early allograft dysfunction in liver transplant recipients and analysis of risk factors. Liver Transpl. 2010 Aug;16(8):943-9. doi: 10.1002/lt.22091.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Patrono D, Cussa D, Sciannameo V, Montanari E, Panconesi R, Berchialla P, Lepore M, Gambella A, Rizza G, Catalano G, Mirabella S, Tandoi F, Lupo F, Balagna R, Salizzoni M, Romagnoli R. Outcome of liver transplantation with grafts from brain-dead donors treated with dual hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion, with particular reference to elderly donors. Am J Transplant. 2022 May;22(5):1382-1395. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16996. Epub 2022 Feb 22.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Petrowsky H, Rana A, Kaldas FM, Sharma A, Hong JC, Agopian VG, Durazo F, Honda H, Gornbein J, Wu V, Farmer DG, Hiatt JR, Busuttil RW. Liver transplantation in highest acuity recipients: identifying factors to avoid futility. Ann Surg. 2014 Jun;259(6):1186-94. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000265.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Schlegel A, van Reeven M, Croome K, Parente A, Dolcet A, Widmer J, Meurisse N, De Carlis R, Hessheimer A, Jochmans I, Mueller M, van Leeuwen OB, Nair A, Tomiyama K, Sherif A, Elsharif M, Kron P, van der Helm D, Borja-Cacho D, Bohorquez H, Germanova D, Dondossola D, Olivieri T, Camagni S, Gorgen A, Patrono D, Cescon M, Croome S, Panconesi R, Carvalho MF, Ravaioli M, Caicedo JC, Loss G, Lucidi V, Sapisochin G, Romagnoli R, Jassem W, Colledan M, De Carlis L, Rossi G, Di Benedetto F, Miller CM, van Hoek B, Attia M, Lodge P, Hernandez-Alejandro R, Detry O, Quintini C, Oniscu GC, Fondevila C, Malago M, Pirenne J, IJzermans JNM, Porte RJ, Dutkowski P, Taner CB, Heaton N, Clavien PA, Polak WG, Muiesan P; DCD Collaborator Group. A multicentre outcome analysis to define global benchmarks for donation after circulatory death liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 2022 Feb;76(2):371-382. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2021.10.004. Epub 2021 Oct 14.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Spoletini G, Ferri F, Mauro A, Mennini G, Bianco G, Cardinale V, Agnes S, Rossi M, Avolio AW, Lai Q. CONUT Score Predicts Early Morbidity After Liver Transplantation: A Collaborative Study. Front Nutr. 2022 Jan 7;8:793885. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2021.793885. eCollection 2021.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Aby ES, Lee E, Saggi SS, Viramontes MR, Grotts JF, Agopian VG, Busuttil RW, Saab S. Pretransplant Sarcopenia in Patients With NASH Cirrhosis Does Not Impact Rehospitalization or Mortality. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2019 Oct;53(9):680-685. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001109.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
4571
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Renal Biopsies in Post-liver Transplantation Patients With Renal Impairment
NCT05326399
RECRUITING
Serum Markers of Ischemia Reperfusion Injury in Liver Transplant Patients
NCT00698399
COMPLETED
Influence of Human Albumin Supplementation on Kidney Dysfunction After Liver Transplantation
NCT06535945
RECRUITING
PHASE4
Impact of a Risk Stratification Tool on the Outcome of Liver Transplant Recipients Colonized With Carbapenem Resistant Enterobacteriaceae: an Observational Study
NCT05594901
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
New Urine and Blood Markers for Acute Kidney Injury in Liver Transplant Patients
NCT00855127
WITHDRAWN
A New Prediction Mode for Predicting the Risk of Pressure Injury in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation
NCT05588271
UNKNOWN
Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate in Kidney Transplant Recipients
NCT05229939
COMPLETED
The Predictors for Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in Liver Transplant Patient
NCT01457534
COMPLETED
Long-term Mortality Post Liver Transplantation in the Era of Modern Immunosuppression.
NCT06636409
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Expanding the Scope of Post-transplant HLA-specific Antibody Detection and Monitoring in Renal Transplant Recipients
NCT06025240
RECRUITING
Intraoperative "p50" Measurement in Liver Transplant Surgeries
NCT06660095
ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
Renal Outcomes Among Post Liver Transplantation Patients
NCT06123260
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Association of Genetic Polymorphism and Acute Kidney Injury After Liver Transplantation
NCT02489474
COMPLETED
Liver Transplantation in Alcoholic Hepatitis
NCT01768715
SUSPENDED
The Regenerative Capacity of the Donor Liver After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: an Ambidirectional Cohort Study
NCT07329296
ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
Acute Kidney Injury and Recovery Mode in Pediatric Liver Transplantation
NCT06598228
COMPLETED
Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation (EASE) in Liver Transplantation
NCT03858088
COMPLETED
Evolution and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation
NCT02917382
UNKNOWN
Establishment of a Personalized Pharmaceutical Plan in Renal or Hepatic Transplant Patients
NCT04295928
UNKNOWN
NA
Renal Perfusion, Filtration and Oxygenation After Liver Transplantation -Effects of av Postoperative Blood Pressure
NCT02455115
COMPLETED
NA
Study of the Evolution Profile of the Renal Doppler in the Perioperative Hepathic Transplantation
NCT04682236
UNKNOWN
Development and Validation of a Clinical Risk Prediction Model for Early Acute Kidney Injury Within 48 Hours After Liver Transplantation
NCT06750770
COMPLETED
Survival and Quality of Life After Liver Transplantation in Patients Aged 65 and Over
NCT04754503
UNKNOWN