AzTrials
AzTrials

Liver Transplant; ComplicationsNCT03946852

Abdominal Regional Perfusion in Donation After Cardiac Death for Multi-Organ Transplantation

A study testing Abdominal Regional Perfusion in people with Liver Transplant; Complications and Ischemia Reperfusion Injury, run by London Health Sciences Centre.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The main purpose of this study is to increase the pool of organs available for donation by performing ARP to recondition donation after cardiac death (DCD) organs prior to transplantation. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 75 years
What is being tested?
Abdominal Regional Perfusion
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
20 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Jun 2019to Jun 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 75 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

None listed.

Who cannot join

  • Inadequate social support for liver transplant
  • Non-compliance with alcohol or narcotic cessation
  • Evidence of uncontrolled infection
  • Other untreated malignancy aside from those listed above
  • Physiologic evidence of frailty based on timed up and go, grip strength, 6 minute walk test, and cognitive testing.
  • Donor Criteria:
Show all 18Show fewer
  • DCD donors offered via TGLN will be considered for assessment via abdominal regional perfusion based on the following parameters. These are in keeping with current criteria for abdominal organ donors.
  • Age: Up to 70 years of age within the initial evaluation period, with plans to expand to 75 y/o if initial results are favourable.
  • BMI: Donor BMI must be less than 30 for consideration
  • DCD donation criteria: Conventional criteria for DCD donation must be met, including no expectation for viable recovery, without meeting criteria for brain death, and expressed desire by family for organ donation.
  • Comorbidity: In the opinion of the on-call transplant surgeon, there should not be excessive comorbidity to exclude organ donation
  • Active infection: There should be no untreated infection.
  • Malignancy: Donors should have no evidence of active malignancy, or in the case of a treated malignancy there should be sufficient interval to rule out recurrence. In select cases, donors with tumors known to be indolent may be considered on a case by case basis.
  • Liver transplant release Criteria:
  • One of the major advantages of ARP beyond reconditioning the organ prior to cold storage and transplant, is an opportunity to assess graft function in-situ prior to transplant. The existing literature supports the use of multiple readily available laboratory tests to evaluate graft function prior to transplant. Donor labs will be drawn every 30 minutes from the perfusion circuit to evaluate organ function.
  • Transaminase: Initial transaminases (AST and ALT) drawn at the start of perfusion must be less than 4 times the upper limit of normal and stay below this threshold throughout the reperfusion process to be considered for use with an absolute cut-off of 500
  • Lactate: Grafts will only be used if lactate levels do not rise during perfusion, ideal organs will have a decrease in serum lactate levels by 1.11 mmol/L per hour
  • Macroscopic appearance: On clinical evaluation, there should be no evidence of fibrosis or cirrhosis and organs should not have a macroscopically steatotic appearance.

Trial locations and contacts

No sites are listed yet.

About this study

The main purpose of this study is to increase the pool of organs available for donation by performing ARP to recondition donation after cardiac death (DCD) organs prior to transplantation. We will compare the outcomes of our ARP DCD liver transplants with historical data to determine the efficacy of this treatment compared to transplantation with standard DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) organs. We will also analyze biological samples from donors and recipients and compare them with outcome data in an effort to determine if any biological markers are able to predict the quality/success of the grafts.

Read the detailed description

Liver Transplantation and Limitations of DCD Transplantation:

Liver transplantation (LT) is the sole curative therapy for end stage liver disease and has emerged as the treatment of choice for hepatocellular carcinoma. Recent evidence has also demonstrated efficacy in a growing number of malignancies including intra/extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma, metastatic neuro-endocrine tumors, and colorectal liver metastases. Despite these advantages, LT is limited by the availability of suitable donor organs resulting in lengthened LT waitlist times. However, during this waiting period patients may deteriorate making them ineligible for LT. In the US, 16,000 patients are listed for LT, and approximately 2000 die annually while waiting for suitable organs. In 2017, over 500 Canadians were on a waiting list for LT and nearly 200 died or withdrew from the transplant list while waiting. Additionally, while LT secondary to hepatitis C is declining, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, alcoholic liver disease and transplant oncology indications are growing, increasing the overall demand for liver transplant.

One strategy to expand the donor pool has been to optimize utilization of organs from donation after cardiac death (DCD). While outcomes of DCD kidney, pancreas and lung transplants show similar patient and graft survival to donation after brain death (DBD) transplants, DCD livers have worse patient and graft survival, higher complications, and costs, along with worse quality of life. DCD liver grafts have twice the rate of early complications including primary non-function (PNF) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD). EAD is a transient condition with the potential for graft function recovery whereas PNF is a more severe complication leading to graft failure requiring emergency re-transplantation. In the long term, the use of DCD liver allografts is associated with a 10 fold increase in biliary complications, typically resulting in graft loss or death. Moreover, there is a high cost associated with complications and readmissions following LT, which can be upwards of $50,000 per patient. Studies investigating factors contributing to these costs have revealed that DCD allografts had the greatest impact on transplant costs. Consequently, initial enthusiasm for the use of DCD livers for LT has waned such that utilization is restricted to only ideal DCD livers from younger donors with short warm and cold ischemia times. Developing methodologies to reduce the complications associated with DCD organs and improve overall outcomes would have an immense impact on the lives of transplant patients while concurrently reducing costs on the healthcare system.

Abdominal Regional Perfusion and Limitations of Normothermic Machine Perfusion:

Conventional DCD recovery utilizes a rapid recovery technique which flushes abdominal organs with cold preservation solution to slow cellular metabolism and evacuate blood/clots to preserve the integrity of the microvasculature. This is preceded by the agonal phase between withdrawal of life support and cessation of cardiac function. During this period, abdominal organs are subject to warm ischemia resulting in accumulation of toxic metabolites, depletion of intracellular energy and anti-oxidant stores, leading to exacerbation of ischemia reperfusion at the time of implantation.

Abdominal Regional Perfusion (ARP) is a technique that has been developed to recondition DCD organs prior to transplantation through the perfusion of abdominal organs in-situ with re-oxygenated blood. This process reverses the effects of ischemia and hypoxia by restoring cellular energy stores and reducing oxygen free-radicals. Additionally, this period of restored abdominal perfusion also allows for functional evaluation of organ viability prior to graft use through measurement of donor serum/bile biochemistry throughout the perfusion process, thereby maximizing the yield of high quality grafts and avoiding the use of grafts that have impaired function.

In the few studies published to date, ARP has demonstrated a decrease in biliary complications by 86%, a decrease in ischemic cholangiopathy rates from 27% to 0% and a drop in EAD from 32% to 12%. Most importantly, graft loss at 30 days was only 2% in ARP compared with 12% in conventional DCD LT. Emerging evidence suggests that with ARP, transplants performed using DCD organs can result in outcomes similar to conventional DBD donors. In addition, other investigators have successfully used ARP to further expand the DCD donor pool by including donors beyond the traditional age limit of 50 years to patients greater than 75. This approach has the potential to dramatically increase the donor pool and has even been demonstrated to improve the quality of other organs used for transplant including kidney and heart transplantation.

Although normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) systems have demonstrated non-inferiority compared to static cold storage in LT by dropping perfusate lactate, improving intraoperative mean arterial pressure, reducing vasopressor requirements and reducing blood product transfusions, the majority (80%) of these donor livers were procured from DBD donors in which static cold storage continues to be the standard of care based upon three decades of favorable outcomes. There remains a paucity of data demonstrating the benefit of NMP in the setting of expanded criteria livers from donors with advanced age, steatosis, and DCD livers where ARP has been of proven benefit. In addition, ARP may also be advantageous due to its in-situ nature with preservation of the neurohormonal axis and communication with other abdominal organs. Few clinical studies have investigated the role of measurable variables in predicting ARP-DCD transplant outcomes; however, some correlation has been found between the effects of lactate levels, transaminase levels and the level of fibrosis on donor organ function. To address these unknowns, an additional goal of this study will be to identify possible mediators for the improved outcomes with abdominal-regional perfusion, and evaluate the utility of biomarkers to predict graft function.

Being tested
Abdominal Regional Perfusion
Keywords
abdominal regional perfusion, Donation after Cardiac Death, Liver Transplantation, Ischemia Reperfusion Injury
Medical subject headings
Reperfusion Injury, Fibrosis, Liver Neoplasms, End Stage Liver Disease

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Abdominal Regional PerfusionDevice

    Abdominal Regional Perfusion

Study groups in NCT03946852
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ARP armExperimentalPatients will receive DCD after therapy after the abdominal reperfusion protocol.
Receives: Device: Abdominal Regional Perfusion

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Primary non-function

    Graft failure requiring re-transplantion

    Measured: 1 week

  2. Early allograft dysfunction

    Transient non-functioning of the liver transplant but with usual recovery to full functioning liver

    Measured: 1 week

  3. Ischemic Cholangiopathy

    Non-anastomotic biliary stricture without other identifiable etiology

    Measured: 1 week to 12 months post transplant

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Overall patient survival

    Patient Mortality at any time post transplant

    Measured: 1 and 5 years

  2. Graft survival

    Need for retransplant secondary to graft failure of any cause, or death

    Measured: 5 years

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted13 May 2019
  2. Study startJun 2019 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionJun 2021 (estimated)
  4. Study completionJun 2026 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
20 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03946852
Sponsor's protocol ID
113712
Status last verified
May 2019
First submitted
9 May 2019
Last updated
13 May 2019
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2018 Mar 31;391(10127):1301-1314. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30010-2. Epub 2018 Jan 5.

    PubMed 29307467
  • Hessheimer AJ, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Fondevila C. Abdominal regional in-situ perfusion in donation after circulatory determination of death donors. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2016 Jun;21(3):322-8. doi: 10.1097/MOT.0000000000000315.

    PubMed 27050485
  • Watson CJE, Hunt F, Messer S, Currie I, Large S, Sutherland A, Crick K, Wigmore SJ, Fear C, Cornateanu S, Randle LV, Terrace JD, Upponi S, Taylor R, Allen E, Butler AJ, Oniscu GC. In situ normothermic perfusion of livers in controlled circulatory death donation may prevent ischemic cholangiopathy and improve graft survival. Am J Transplant. 2019 Jun;19(6):1745-1758. doi: 10.1111/ajt.15241. Epub 2019 Feb 1.

    PubMed 30589499
  • Ruiz P, Gastaca M, Bustamante FJ, Ventoso A, Palomares I, Prieto M, Fernandez JR, Salvador P, Pijoan JI, Valdivieso A. Favorable Outcomes After Liver Transplantation With Normothermic Regional Perfusion From Donors After Circulatory Death: A Single-center Experience. Transplantation. 2019 May;103(5):938-943. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002391.

    PubMed 30063694
  • Jay CL, Lyuksemburg V, Ladner DP, Wang E, Caicedo JC, Holl JL, Abecassis MM, Skaro AI. Ischemic cholangiopathy after controlled donation after cardiac death liver transplantation: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011 Feb;253(2):259-64. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318204e658.

    PubMed 21245668

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Abdominal Regional Perfusion in people with Liver Transplant; Complications and Ischemia Reperfusion Injury, run by London Health Sciences Centre.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 0 inclusion and 18 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 May 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Crystal Engelage, PhD (519-685-8500 ext. 35530, crystal.engelage@lhsc.on.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Primary non-function (time frame: 1 week). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03946852, which also lists 5 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 May 2019.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in