Francesco Tandoi

Many advantages have been reported with the use of machine perfusion (MP) to rescue extended criteria donor (ECD) grafts, improving both short- and long-term post-liver transplantation (LT) outcomes. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common post-LT complication associated with these grafts and may compromise patient outcomes and increase LT-related costs. The aim of the study was to analyze the incidence of AKI in recipients of MP-treated grafts compared with those receiving conventionally cold-stored (SCS) grafts, both before and after a propensity score matching (PSM). From a prospectively maintained database, LT recipients of MP-treated grafts were compared with SCS grafts transplanted in the same study period (January 2022–May 2025). PSM was performed based on donor risk index (DRI), macrosteatosis (≥ or p = 0.02), higher proportion of DCD (10% vs. 0, p = 0.04), and higher frequency of moderate steatosis (macro ≥ 30%, 10% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.09). AKI rates were similar between groups (63% vs. 45.6%, p = 0.16), as was the distribution across AKI stages. After PSM, donor and recipient characteristics were balanced, and AKI rates remained similar between groups (58.6% vs. 47.1%, p = 0.39). Donor diabetes and recipient age were independent predictors of AKI in multivariate analysis (donor diabetes OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.347–8.030; recipient age: OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.015–1.097, both p < 0.05). MCP-1 and TNF-α levels measured in the perfusate fluid within the first minutes of perfusion were positively correlated with post-LT creatinine peak (MCP-1, p = 0.00023, R = 0.58; TNF-α, p = 0.0004, R = 0.57). In conclusion, machine perfusion remains a valuable strategy for rescuing ECD liver grafts. In the current era—characterized by increasing use of machine-perfused grafts and extended criteria donors—recipients demonstrate postoperative renal outcomes comparable to those receiving conventionally preserved grafts.

Background and aims: Besides the increased risk of perioperative morbidity, graft failure, and mortality, the majority of PVT are diagnosed at liver transplantation (LT). Improving preoperative management and patient selection may lead to better short-term and long-term outcomes and reduce the risk of a futile LT. The authors aimed to identify predictors of adverse outcomes after LT in patients with nonmalignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and improve donor to recipient matching by analyzing the results of the Italian cohort of LT recipients. Methods: Adult patients who underwent LT in Italy between January 2000 and February 2020 diagnosed with PVT pre-LT or at time of LT were considered eligible for inclusion. Based on a survey encompassing all 26 surgeons participating in the study, a binary composite outcome was defined. Patients were classified as having the composite event if at least one of these conditions occurred: operative time more than 600 min, estimated blood loss greater than 5000 ml, more than 20 ICU days, 90 days mortality, 90 days retransplant. Results: Seven hundred fourteen patients were screened and 698 met the inclusion criteria. The analysis reports the results of 568 patients that fulfilled the criteria to enter the composite outcome analysis. Overall, 156 patients (27.5%) developed the composite outcome. PVT stage 3/4 at transplant and need for any surgical correction of PVT are independent predictors of the composite outcome occurrence. When stratified by PVT grade, overall survival at 1-year ranges from 89.0% with PVT grade 0/1 to 67.4% in patients with PVT grade 3/4 at LT (P<0.001). Nevertheless, patients with severe PVT can improve their survival when identified risk factors are not present. Conclusions: Potential LT candidates affected by PVT have a benefit from LT that should be adequately balanced on liver function and type of inflow reconstruction needed to mitigate the incidence of adverse events. Nonetheless, the absence of specific risk factors may improve the outcomes even in patients with PVT grades 3–4.

Background: Liver transplantation is the state-of-the-art curative treatment for end-stage liver disease. Imaging is a key element in the detection of postoperative complications. So far, limited data is available regarding the best radiologic approach to monitor children after liver transplantation. Objective: To harmonize the imaging of pediatric liver transplantation, the European Society of Pediatric Radiology Abdominal Taskforce initiated a survey addressing the current status of imaging including the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases. This paper reports the responses related to postoperative imaging. Materials and methods: An online survey, initiated in 2021, asked European centers performing pediatric liver transplantation 48 questions about their imaging approach. In total, 26 centers were contacted, and 22 institutions from 11 countries returned the survey. Results: All sites commence ultrasound (US) monitoring within 24 h after liver transplantation. Monitoring frequency varies across sites, ranging from every 8 h to 72 h in early, and from daily to sporadic use in late postoperative phases. Predefined US protocols are used by 73% of sites. This commonly includes gray scale, color Doppler, and quantitative flow assessment. Alternative flow imaging techniques, contrast-enhanced US, and elastography are applied at 31.8%, 18.2%, and 63.6% of sites, respectively. Computed tomography is performed at 86.4% of sites when clarification is needed. Magnetic resonance imaging is used for selected cases at 36.4% of sites, mainly for assessment of biliary abnormalities or when blood tests are abnormal. Conclusion: Diagnostic imaging is extensively used for postoperative surveillance of children after liver transplantation. While US is generally prioritized, substantial differences were noted in US protocol, timing, and monitoring frequency. The study highlights potential areas for future optimization and standardization of imaging, essential for conducting multicenter studies.

Background: Liver transplantation is the state-of-the-art curative treatment for end-stage liver disease. Imaging is a key element in the detection of intraoperative and postoperative complications. So far, only limited data regarding the best radiological approach to monitor children during liver transplantation is available.Objective: To harmonize the imaging of pediatric liver transplantation, the European Society of Pediatric Radiology Abdominal Taskforce initiated a survey addressing the current status of imaging including the pre-, intra- and postoperative phase. This paper reports the responses related to intraoperative imaging.Materials and methods: An online survey, initiated in 2021, asked European centers performing pediatric liver transplantation 48 questions about their imaging approach. In total, 26 centers were contacted, and 22 institutions from 11 countries returned the survey.Results: Intraoperative ultrasound (US) is used by all sites to assess the quality of the vascular anastomosis in order to ensure optimal perfusion of the liver transplant. Vessel depiction is commonly achieved using color Doppler (95.3%). Additional US-based techniques are employed by fewer centers (power angio mode, 28.6%; B-flow, 19%; contrast-enhanced US, 14.3%). Most centers prefer a collaborative approach, with surgeons responsible for probe handling, while radiologists operate the US machine (47.6%). Less commonly, the intraoperative US is performed by the surgeon alone (28.6%) or by the radiologist alone (23.8%). Timing of US, imaging frequency, and documentation practices vary among centers.Conclusion: Intraoperative US is consistently utilized across all sites during pediatric liver transplantation. However, considerable variations were observed in terms of the US setup, technique preferences, timing of controls, and documentation practices. These differences provide valuable insights for future optimization and harmonization studies.

Background: Liver transplantation is the state-of-the-art curative treatment in end-stage liver disease. Imaging is a key element for successful organ-transplantation to assist surgical planning. So far, only limited data regarding the best radiological approach to prepare children for liver transplantation is available. Objectives: In an attempt to harmonize imaging surrounding pediatric liver transplantation, the European Society of Pediatric Radiology (ESPR) Abdominal Taskforce initiated a survey addressing the current status of imaging including the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phase. This paper reports the responses on preoperative imaging. Material and methods: An online survey, initiated in 2021, asked European centers performing pediatric liver transplantation 48 questions about their imaging approach. In total, 26 centers were contacted and 22 institutions from 11 countries returned the survey. From 2018 to 2020, the participating centers collectively conducted 1,524 transplantations, with a median of 20 transplantations per center per annum (range, 8–60). Results: Most sites (64%) consider ultrasound their preferred modality to define anatomy and to plan surgery in children before liver transplantation, and additional cross-sectional imaging is only used to answer specific questions (computed tomography [CT], 90.9%; magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], 54.5%). One-third of centers (31.8%) rely primarily on CT for pre-transplant evaluation. Imaging protocols differed substantially regarding applied CT scan ranges, number of contrast phases (range 1–4 phases), and applied MRI techniques. Conclusion: Diagnostic imaging is generally used in the work-up of children before liver transplantation. Substantial differences were noted regarding choice of modalities and protocols. We have identified starting points for future optimization and harmonization of the imaging approach to multicenter studies.

Episode of haemoptysis in a 25–year–old woman with the following medical history: surgical closure of Botallo‘s duct at the age of 5 months, coeliac disease, growth retardation, polycystic ovary, visus alterations. In the emergency room CT angiography of the chest showed the presence of subpleural parenchymal consolidation in the right lower lobe, with associated ground–glass opacities, cardiomegaly, severe pulmonary artery dilatation and hepatomegaly with intrathoracic involvement by a hernia of Morgagni on the right side. A porto–systemic shunt with an intrahepatic course was also noted in the duct at the VIII segment with an autonomic outlet in the right atrium. The patient was transferred to the Internal Medicine ward. Objective examination revealed an elf facies with hypertelorism, short stature, bradypsychism. On interview she reported dyspnoea on light exertion and frequent lipohymic episodes. Haematochemical examinations showed increased of bilirubinemia mainly indirect, Transaminases and of NTproBNP and normal ammonium levels. Blood gas analysis showed a tendency to respiratory alkalosis with oxyaemia at lower limits. Because of the suspicion of a syndromic picture, a genetic examination was performed. Cardiological evaluation showed a high ultrasound probability of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Transferred to cardiology, catheterisation confirmed pulmonary arterial hypertension (mPAP 64mmHg) precapillary (wedge 4mmHg) with high PVR (11 Wood Units) not responsive to nitric oxide. In addition, there was a superior vena cava protruding into the coronary sinus and an extrahepatic shunt with an isolated outlet in the RA without gradient. The hepatobiliary surgery consultation concluded for Abernethy syndrome, which is a rare congenital syndrome characterised by an extrahepatic portosystemic shunt in which the blood from the splanchnic and lienal circulation bypasses the portal vein and the liver, draining into the systemic circulation via an abnormal conduit. PH is a rare complication of this syndrome, maintained by hyperafflux, vasoactive mediators and the formation of microthrombi and intimal fibrosis in the pulmonary circulation. An HR–CT excluded venulo–capillary plexiform disease. Macitentan 10 mg/day was introduced, then continued at home for the benefit shown and follow–up at the Pulmonary Work Group was initiated. This PH, due to its association with an extremely rare pathology, required the collaboration of a diverse group of specialists.