Background: Liver Transplantation (LT) is limited by the shortage of suitable grafts, leading to increasing use of Extended Criteria Donors (ECD) and Donation after Circulatory Death (DCD) grafts. These organs are more vulnerable to Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury (IRI) and Early Allograft Dysfunction (EAD). Machine perfusion (MP), particularly Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion (HOPE), may improve graft preservation and support safer utilization of marginal organs. Aim of the study: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of MP in adult LT at a high-volume transplant center, with particular focus on HOPE compared with Static Cold Storage (SCS). Materials and methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted on 427 adult deceased-donor LTs performed between August 2022 and December 2025. Grafts were preserved using HOPE (n = 247), SCS (n = 166), or NMP (n = 14). Primary endpoints were graft and patient survival. As secondary endpoints we evaluated hospital stay, major morbidity, Primary Non-Function (PNF), EAD and post-operative complications. Cost analyses were based on in-hospital transplantation costs and national DRG reimbursement. Weighted analyses were performed to adjust for baseline differences in donor and recipient characteristics. We performed two different cost-effectiveness analyses, one evaluating the role of MP in DBD transplantation and one evaluating a DCD transplant programme enabled by MP. Cost parameters were Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) per life-year gained and Number Needed to Treat (NNT). Results: Machine perfusion use increased progressively, reaching 71.3% of LTs in 2025. The HOPE group included a higher proportion of ECD grafts. Despite this higher-risk profile, early outcomes were comparable between HOPE and SCS, with no significant differences in PNF, EAD, vascular or biliary complications, Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), major morbidity, in-hospital mortality, or length of stay. Graft survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 85.2%, 83.4%, and 79.7% after HOPE and 86.0%, 84.3%, and 84.3% after SCS, with no significant difference. Patient survival was also comparable. After weighted analysis in the DBD cohort, 30-day graft loss was lower in the HOPE group, with borderline statistical significance (risk difference -7.2%; p 0.06; RR 0.46). HOPE increased total costs mainly due to the perfusion procedure itself, while post-operative costs were similar to SCS. Most transplantations remained below the national DRG reimbursement threshold in both groups. The subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis showed that about 14 HOPE transplants are needed to avoid one early graft loss (NNT 13.9). Conversion into life-years through the cure model (13.4 discounted years per event avoided) yields an ICER of about €13,300 per life-year in the graft-reallocation scenario. DCD-HOPE outcomes were comparable to those of DBD-HOPE recipients. For cost-effectiveness analysis we considered that, in Italy, DCD could only be transplanted after the reconditioning with MP. Assuming factor f as the net survival benefit compared with remaining on the waiting list, the base-case analysis (f 0.7) yielded an ICER of €3,979 per life-year gained. Across all plausible scenarios, ICERs ranged from €2,786 to €9,285 per life-year gained. The NMP cohort included 14 high-risk grafts, mostly DCD, with all patients alive at a median follow-up of 7 months. Conclusions: In our study, HOPE proved to be a safe and clinically valuable preservation strategy in a high-risk liver transplant population, showing comparable outcomes to SCS. The results support the role of HOPE in expanding the donor pool, particularly through DCD transplantation, without increasing post-operative resource utilization. Exploratory economic analyses suggest a favourable cost-effectiveness profile, especially when HOPE enables otherwise unavailable DCD transplants.
Presupposti dello studio: Il trapianto di fegato è limitato dalla carenza di graft idonei, con conseguente crescente utilizzo di donatori a criteri estesi (ECD) e dopo arresto cardiocircolatorio (DCD). Questi organi sono più suscettibili a ischemia-riperfusione (IRI) ed Early Allograft Dysfunction (EAD). La Machine Perfusion (MP), in particolare la Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion (HOPE), può migliorare la preservazione del graft e favorire l’utilizzo di organi marginali. Scopo dello studio: Valutare l’impatto clinico ed economico della MP nel trapianto di fegato adulto, con particolare attenzione al confronto tra HOPE e Static Cold Storage (SCS). Materiali e metodi: Studio retrospettivo monocentrico su 427 trapianti di fegato da donatore deceduto eseguiti tra agosto 2022 e dicembre 2025. I graft sono stati preservati mediante HOPE (n=247), SCS (n=166) o Normothermic Machine Perfusion (NMP) (n=14). Gli endpoint primari erano la sopravvivenza del graft e del paziente; quelli secondari comprendevano degenza ospedaliera, grave morbilità, Primary Non-Function (PNF), EAD e complicanze post-operatorie. Le analisi economiche si basavano sui costi intraospedalieri e sul rimborso DRG. Sono state eseguite analisi pesate per correggere le differenze basali e due analisi di costo-efficacia: una nel contesto DBD e una relativa al programma DCD reso possibile dalla MP. I parametri considerati erano ICER per anno di vita guadagnato e Number Needed to Treat (NNT). Risultati: L’utilizzo della MP è aumentato progressivamente, raggiungendo il 71,3% dei trapianti nel 2025. Il gruppo HOPE includeva una quota maggiore di ECD rispetto a SCS. Nonostante il profilo di rischio più elevato, gli outcome precoci sono risultati sovrapponibili, senza differenze significative in termini di PNF, EAD, complicanze vascolari o biliari, AKI, grave morbilità, mortalità intraospedaliera e degenza. La sopravvivenza del graft a 1, 2 e 3 anni è stata rispettivamente dell’85,2%, 83,4% e 79,7% dopo HOPE e dell’86,0%, 84,3% e 84,3% dopo SCS; anche la sopravvivenza del paziente è risultata comparabile. Nell’analisi pesata DBD, la perdita del graft a 30 giorni è risultata inferiore con HOPE (risk difference -7,2%; p=0,06; RR 0,46). HOPE ha aumentato i costi principalmente per la procedura di perfusione, mentre i costi post-operatori sono rimasti simili a SCS e nella maggior parte dei casi inferiori al rimborso DRG. Circa 14 trapianti con HOPE erano necessari per prevenire una perdita precoce del graft (NNT 13,9). Applicando un modello di cura statistico (13,4 anni scontati per evento evitato), l’ICER era di circa €13.300 per anno di vita guadagnato nello scenario di riallocazione del graft. Gli outcome DCD-HOPE sono risultati comparabili a quelli DBD-HOPE. Considerando che in Italia i graft DCD sono trapiantabili solo dopo ricondizionamento mediante MP, l’analisi base (f=0,7) ha mostrato un ICER di €3.979 per anno di vita guadagnato, con valori compresi tra €2.786 e €9.285 negli scenari plausibili. La coorte NMP comprendeva 14 graft ad alto rischio, prevalentemente DCD, con tutti i pazienti vivi a un follow-up mediano di 7 mesi. Conclusioni: HOPE si è dimostrata una strategia di preservazione sicura ed efficace in una popolazione ad alto rischio, con outcome comparabili a SCS. I risultati supportano il ruolo della HOPE nell’espansione del pool di donatori, in particolare DCD, senza incremento delle risorse post-operatorie. Le analisi economiche esplorative suggeriscono inoltre un favorevole profilo di costo-efficacia, soprattutto nei programmi DCD resi possibili dalla HOPE.
From Pioneering to Standard Practice: Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Utility of Machine Perfusion in a High-Volume Liver Transplant Center
TOGNON, FRANCESCO
2025/2026
Abstract
Background: Liver Transplantation (LT) is limited by the shortage of suitable grafts, leading to increasing use of Extended Criteria Donors (ECD) and Donation after Circulatory Death (DCD) grafts. These organs are more vulnerable to Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury (IRI) and Early Allograft Dysfunction (EAD). Machine perfusion (MP), particularly Hypothermic Oxygenated Machine Perfusion (HOPE), may improve graft preservation and support safer utilization of marginal organs. Aim of the study: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of MP in adult LT at a high-volume transplant center, with particular focus on HOPE compared with Static Cold Storage (SCS). Materials and methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted on 427 adult deceased-donor LTs performed between August 2022 and December 2025. Grafts were preserved using HOPE (n = 247), SCS (n = 166), or NMP (n = 14). Primary endpoints were graft and patient survival. As secondary endpoints we evaluated hospital stay, major morbidity, Primary Non-Function (PNF), EAD and post-operative complications. Cost analyses were based on in-hospital transplantation costs and national DRG reimbursement. Weighted analyses were performed to adjust for baseline differences in donor and recipient characteristics. We performed two different cost-effectiveness analyses, one evaluating the role of MP in DBD transplantation and one evaluating a DCD transplant programme enabled by MP. Cost parameters were Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) per life-year gained and Number Needed to Treat (NNT). Results: Machine perfusion use increased progressively, reaching 71.3% of LTs in 2025. The HOPE group included a higher proportion of ECD grafts. Despite this higher-risk profile, early outcomes were comparable between HOPE and SCS, with no significant differences in PNF, EAD, vascular or biliary complications, Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), major morbidity, in-hospital mortality, or length of stay. Graft survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 85.2%, 83.4%, and 79.7% after HOPE and 86.0%, 84.3%, and 84.3% after SCS, with no significant difference. Patient survival was also comparable. After weighted analysis in the DBD cohort, 30-day graft loss was lower in the HOPE group, with borderline statistical significance (risk difference -7.2%; p 0.06; RR 0.46). HOPE increased total costs mainly due to the perfusion procedure itself, while post-operative costs were similar to SCS. Most transplantations remained below the national DRG reimbursement threshold in both groups. The subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis showed that about 14 HOPE transplants are needed to avoid one early graft loss (NNT 13.9). Conversion into life-years through the cure model (13.4 discounted years per event avoided) yields an ICER of about €13,300 per life-year in the graft-reallocation scenario. DCD-HOPE outcomes were comparable to those of DBD-HOPE recipients. For cost-effectiveness analysis we considered that, in Italy, DCD could only be transplanted after the reconditioning with MP. Assuming factor f as the net survival benefit compared with remaining on the waiting list, the base-case analysis (f 0.7) yielded an ICER of €3,979 per life-year gained. Across all plausible scenarios, ICERs ranged from €2,786 to €9,285 per life-year gained. The NMP cohort included 14 high-risk grafts, mostly DCD, with all patients alive at a median follow-up of 7 months. Conclusions: In our study, HOPE proved to be a safe and clinically valuable preservation strategy in a high-risk liver transplant population, showing comparable outcomes to SCS. The results support the role of HOPE in expanding the donor pool, particularly through DCD transplantation, without increasing post-operative resource utilization. Exploratory economic analyses suggest a favourable cost-effectiveness profile, especially when HOPE enables otherwise unavailable DCD transplants.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tognon_Francesco.pdf
Accesso riservato
Dimensione
2.01 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.01 MB | Adobe PDF |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/109180