Preview

Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)

Advanced search

Clinical factors associated with pathological changes in the liver graft in the long-term post-transplant period

https://doi.org/10.20340/vmi-rvz.2026.1.TX.1

Abstract

Background. Abandonment of protocol liver biopsies in most transplant centers allows clinically significant graft pathology — fibrosis, steatosis, chronic hepatitis, ductopenia — to remain undetected for prolonged periods, even in the absence of graft dysfunction or laboratory abnormalities, resulting in unexpected late graft failure.
Objective. To assess the prevalence of bile duct loss, graft steatosis, active hepatitis, and liver fibrosis, and to identify independent clinical and laboratory factors associated with these pathological changes in the long-term posttransplant period.
Materials and Methods. Histological findings from 168 adequate liver biopsy specimens obtained from 178 adult liver transplant recipients were retrospectively analyzed. All biopsies were performed no earlier than 12 months post-transplantation (median follow-up 57.8 [26.3; 94.9] months). Liver function test values were normalized to sex-specific upper limits of normal. Overt graft dysfunction was defined as elevation of ALT, AST, or alkaline phosphatase above 1.5× ULN. Fibrosis was assessed using METAVIR and the liver allograft fibrosis (LAF) scale, evaluating portal, sinusoidal, and centrilobular components separately. Statistical methods included Mann–Whitney U test, chi-square test, Spearman rank correlation, and multivariate logistic regression.
Results. Graft steatosis (>5% of hepatocytes) was detected in 29.2% of cases, steatohepatitis in 14.9%, active hepatitis (METAVIR A2–A3) in 10.1%, advanced fibrosis (METAVIR F3–F4) in 14.9%, and ductopenia in 16.1%. On multivariate analysis, steatosis and steatohepatitis were independently associated with elevated BMI, eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m², and fatty liver disease as the original indication for transplantation; steatohepatitis was additionally associated with post-transplant diabetes. Advanced portal fibrosis (LAFp) was independently associated with overt graft dysfunction, time elapsed since transplantation, and low eGFR; sinusoidal fibrosis with low eGFR alone; centrilobular fibrosis with younger donor age and cyclosporine use. Ductopenia was independently associated with autoimmune liver disease as the transplant indication and with biliary strictures.
Conclusion. Late graft disease encompasses at least two distinct pathological patterns — chronic hepatitis and graft steatotic liver disease — differing in risk factors, progression kinetics, and laboratory markers. Reduced eGFR emerges as an unexpectedly robust independent predictor of multiple histological injury patterns in adult recipients. These findings provide a rationale for reintroducing protocol biopsy in the long-term post-transplant follow-up.

About the Authors

V. E. Syutkin
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Vladimir E. Syutkin, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Department of Surgery with courses in oncologic surgery, endoscopy, surgical pathology, clinical transplantation, and organ donation; Leading Researcher, Liver Transplantation  Department, N.V. Sklifosovsky Research Institute of Emergency Care, Moscow Health Department

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



S. E. Voskanyan
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Sergey E. Voskanyan, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, MD, PhD Professor, Deputy Chief Physician for Surgical Care, Head of the Center for Surgery and Transplantology, Head of the Department of Surgery with Courses in Oncologic Surgery, Endoscopy, Surgical Pathology, Clinical Transplantology, and Organ
Donation at the Medical and Biological University of Innovation and Continuous Education

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



S. V. Lishchuk
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Sergey V. Lishchuk, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Pathology Department, Medical and Biological University of Innovations and Continuous Education

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



E. A. Dubova
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Elena A. Dubova, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Pathologist, Medical and Biological University of Innovation and Continuous Education

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



V. S. Rudakov
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Vladimir S. Rudakov, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Surgeon, Surgical Department for Coordination of Human Organ and/or Tissue Donation, Surgeon, Surgical Department No. 2

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



A. S. Lukianchikova
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Anna S. Luk'yanchikova, Surgeon, Operating Unit #1, Surgical Department

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



E. A. Ionova
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Elena A. Ionova, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Department of Radiology, Medical and Biological University of Innovation and Continuous Education

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



A. N. Bashkov
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Andrey N. Bashkov, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Radiation Diagnostics Center, Head of the Department of Radiation and Radioisotope Diagnostics

 Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia 


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



E. I. Matkevich
Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency
Russian Federation

Elena I. Matkevich, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Radiologist, Head of the MRI Diagnostics Department, Radiation Diagnostics Center

Marshala Novikova st., 23, Moscow, 123098, Russia


Competing Interests:

 The authors declare no competing interests. 



References

1. Adam R., Karam V., Cailliez V., et al., 2018 Annual Report of the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR) - 50-year evolution of liver transplantation. Transpl Int, 2018. 31(12): p. 1293-1317. PMID: 30259574 https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.13358

2. Bellamy C.O.C., O'leary J.G., Adeyi O., et al., Banff 2022 Liver Group Meeting report: Monitoring long-term allograft health. Am J Transplant, 2024. 24(6): p. 905-917. PMID: 38461883 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajt.2024.03.008

3. Saeed N., Glass L., Sharma P., et al., Incidence and Risks for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Steatohepatitis Post-liver Transplant: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Transplantation, 2019. 103(11): p. e345-e354. PMID: 31415032 https://doi.org/ 10.1097/TP.0000000000002916

4. Losurdo G., Castellaneta A., Rendina M., et al., Systematic review with meta-analysis: de novo non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in liver-transplanted patients. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2018. 47(6): p. 704-714. PMID: 29359341 https://doi.org/ 10.1111/apt.14521

5. Pageaux G.P., Bismuth M., Perney P., et al., Alcohol relapse after liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease: does it matter? J Hepatol, 2003. 38(5): p. 629-634. PMID: 12713874 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-8278(03)00088-6

6. Burra P., Mioni D., Cecchetto A., et al., Histological features after liver transplantation in alcoholic cirrhotics. J Hepatol, 2001. 34(5): p. 716-722. PMID: 11434618 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-8278(01)00002-2

7. Chowdhury A.B. and Mehta K.J., Liver biopsy for assessment of chronic liver diseases: a synopsis. Clinical and experimental medicine, 2023. 23(2): p. 273-285. PMID: 35192111 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10238-022-00799-z

8. Evans H.M., Kelly D.A., Mckiernan P.J., et al., Progressive histological damage in liver allografts following pediatric liver transplantation. Hepatology, 2006. 43(5): p. 1109-1117. PMID: 16628633 https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.21152

9. Scheenstra R., Peeters P.M., Verkade H.J., et al., Graft fibrosis after pediatric liver transplantation: ten years of follow-up. Hepatology, 2009. 49(3): p. 880-886. PMID: 19101912 https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.22686

10. Venturi C., Sempoux C., Bueno J., et al., Novel histologic scoring system for long-term allograft fibrosis after liver transplantation in children. Am J Transplant, 2012. 12(11): p. 2986-2996. PMID: 22882699 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04210.x

11. Venturi C., Sempoux C., Quinones J.A., et al., Dynamics of allograft fibrosis in pediatric liver transplantation. Am J Transplant, 2014. 14(7): p. 1648-1656. PMID: 24934832 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.12740

12. Rhu J., Ha S.Y., Lee S., et al., Risk factors of silent allograft fibrosis 10 years post-pediatric liver transplantation. Scientific reports, 2020. 10(1): p. 1833. PMID: 32019996 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58714-z

13. Martin S.R., Russo P., Dubois J., et al., Centrilobular fibrosis in long-term follow-up of pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplantation, 2002. 74(6): p. 828-836. PMID: 12364864 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007890-200209270-00017

14. Nakazawa Y., Jonsson J.R., Walker N.I., et al., Fibrous obliterative lesions of veins contribute to progressive fibrosis in chronic liver allograft rejection. Hepatology, 2000. 32(6): p. 1240-1247. PMID: 11093730 https://doi.org/10.1053/jhep.2000.20350

15. Fouquet V., Alves A., Branchereau S., et al., Long-term outcome of pediatric liver transplantation for biliary atresia: a 10-year follow-up in a single center. Liver Transpl, 2005. 11(2): p. 152-160. PMID: 15666395 https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.20358

16. Markiewicz-Kijewska M., Szymanska S., Pyzlak M., et al., Liver Histopathology in Late Protocol Biopsies after Pediatric Liver Transplantation. Children, 2021. 8(8). PMID: 34438562 https://doi.org/10.3390/children8080671

17. Egawa H., Miyagawa-Hayashino A., Haga H., et al., Non-inflammatory centrilobular sinusoidal fibrosis in pediatric liver transplant recipients under tacrolimus withdrawal. Hepatol Res, 2012. 42(9): p. 895-903. PMID: 22524409 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1872-034X.2012.01003.x

18. Varma S., Ambroise J., Komuta M., et al., Progressive Fibrosis Is Driven by Genetic Predisposition, Allo-immunity, and Inflammation in Pediatric Liver Transplant Recipients. EBioMedicine, 2016. 9: p. 346-355. PMID: 27333038 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.05.040

19. Pinon M., Pizzol A., Chiado C., et al., Evaluation of Graft Fibrosis, Inflammation, and Donor-specific Antibodies at Protocol Liver Biopsies in Pediatric Liver Transplant Patients: A Single-center Experience. Transplantation, 2022. 106(1): p. 85-95. PMID: 33496554 https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000003649

20. Sebagh M., Rifai K., Feray C., et al., All liver recipients benefit from the protocol 10-year liver biopsies. Hepatology, 2003. 37(6): p. 1293-1301. PMID: 12774007 https://doi.org/10.1053/jhep.2003.50231

21. Neves Souza L., De Martino R.B., Sanchez-Fueyo A., et al., Histopathology of 460 liver allografts removed at retransplantation: A shift in disease patterns over 27 years. Clin Transplant, 2018. 32(4): p. e13227. PMID: 29478248 https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.13227

22. Mourad M.M., Algarni A., Liossis C., et al., Aetiology and risk factors of ischaemic cholangiopathy after liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol, 2014. 20(20): p. 6159-6169. PMID: 24876737 https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i20.6159

23. Ekong U.D., Gupta N.A., Urban R., et al., 20- to 25-year patient and graft survival following a single pediatric liver transplant-Analysis of the United Network of Organ Sharing database: Where to go from here. Pediatr Transplant, 2019. 23(6): p. e13523. PMID: 31211487 https://doi.org/10.1111/petr.13523

24. Syutkin V.E., Salienko A.A., Olisov O.D., et al., Recurrence of autoimmune diseases after liver transplantation. Transplantologiya. The Russian Journal of Transplantation, 2022. 14(4): 421-431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23873/2074-0506-2022-14-4-421-431

25. Ravikumar R., Tsochatzis E., Jose S., et al., Risk factors for recurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis after liver transplantation. J Hepatol, 2015. 63(5): p. 1139-1146. PMID: 26149628 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2015.07.001

26. Aguilar M.T. and Carey E.J., Current Status of Liver Transplantation for Primary Biliary Cholangitis. Clinics in liver disease, 2018. 22(3): p. 613-624.

27. PMID: 30031419 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cld.2018.03.013

28. Vannas M., Arola J., Nordin A., et al., Value of posttransplant protocol biopsies in 2 biliary autoimmune liver diseases: A step toward personalized immunosuppressive treatment. Medicine, 2022. 101(2): p. e28509. PMID: 35014182 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000028509


Review

For citations:


Syutkin V.E., Voskanyan S.E., Lishchuk S.V., Dubova E.A., Rudakov V.S., Lukianchikova A.S., Ionova E.A., Bashkov A.N., Matkevich E.I. Clinical factors associated with pathological changes in the liver graft in the long-term post-transplant period. Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH). 2026;16(1):164-176. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20340/vmi-rvz.2026.1.TX.1

Views: 206

JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2226-762X (Print)
ISSN 2782-1579 (Online)