2025/04/30 by Hannah Esser, Iris E. M. de Jong, Floris M Roos +25 · 1 voice
Medicine · #Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment #Liver Disease and Transplantation #Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
paper · pdf · doi:10.1093/bjs/znae321
openalex publication_date 2025/04/30 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) represents the standard of care for patients with end-stage liver disease, acute liver failure, and certain types of liver-related malignancies such as hepatocellular carcinoma1. Although in the initial phase following OLT patient survival is mainly determined by hepatocyte function and vascular complications2–4, long-term graft survival is often determined by biliary complications. Biliary complications are post-OLT complications affecting the biliary tract and occur in 20–40% of liver transplant recipients depending on the definition, reporting accuracy, experience, graft type, etc.5–10. The pathogenesis of biliary complications is only partially understood, and the clinical implications can be severe; biliary complications often require multiple therapeutic interventions and can result in re-transplantation or even death5,10. Besides an increase in patient morbidity and mortality rates, biliary complications also translate into increased medical care costs11,12 and are the main cause for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation to be 30% more expensive than donation after brain death (DBD) liver transplantation13. The term biliary complications encompasses a plethora of complications affecting the biliary tract including biliary leakage, anastomotic strictures, and non-anastomotic strictures (NAS). NAS are regarded as one of the most troublesome biliary complications as they often remain therapy-resistant and frequently result in graft loss5,14. NAS are diagnosed in up to 44% of recipients of DCD liver grafts and in about 5% of recipients of DBD liver grafts8,15. Consistency in how to diagnose and report biliary complications in OLT is currently lacking and therefore clinical studies are often non-comparable, as reflected by the high variability in NAS incidence across different studies, hampering advances in the field. We here report the results of the consensus voting and discussing as part of the BileducTx meeting held in Innsbruck on 14–15 December 2023. These guidelines provide clarity on the definition, grading, monitoring, and reporting of post-OLT biliary complications aiming to facilitate future clinical trial development. A faculty was chosen based on their expertise and publication record in the field of liver transplantation and biliary (patho)physiology from both clinical as well as more fundamental backgrounds. Following a formal review of the topic at the conference, the experts were asked to vote on statements regarding the definition and monitoring of post-OLT biliary complications followed by an open discussion. After the conference, refined statements were then sent to the experts for online voting according to a modified Delphi methodology (agree/disagree, make recommendations for changes). Statements were agreed on or dismissed based on an 80% consensus threshold. Three rounds of online voting were undertaken followed by an additional round of online discussion16. Biliary complications encompass any complication after OLT involving the biliary tract. These range from biliary leaks at the anastomosis to strictures at any other location, either with or without intrahepatic biloma, prestenotic dilations, vanishing ducts, recurrent cholangitis, or biliary casts and/or sludge17,18. This heterogeneity in presentation and location of biliary complications as well as the different post-OLT time intervals used for biliary complications assessment have led to inconsistencies in the literature. In addition, radiological appearance and clinical pictures can be similar for biliary complications of different aetiologies, further complicating proper classification. For example, biliary strictures due to recurrence of primary sclerosing cholangitis, hepatic artery thrombosis, or post-ischaemic and immune-mediated injuries are generally indistinguishable on cholangiography (either endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP)). Similarly, the clinical presentation of NAS can be mimicked by other processes: anastomotic strictures that, if ignored or insufficiently treated, may progress to (diffuse) non-anastomotic strictures; or cholangitis after OLT may develop from already existing cholestasis following increased bile viscosity damaging the bile duct wall and contributing to the development of NAS. Therefore, it may be challenging to pinpoint the exact aetiology in individual patients, rendering terms such as ischaemic-type biliary lesions or ischaemic cholangiopathy impractical. To overcome this problem, it has been proposed to use the more general term ‘post-transplant cholangiopathy’. We support the use of this terminology and will use post-transplant cholangiopathy to indicate strictures or other complications that develop at any location in the biliary tree other than the anastomosis with an intact vascular supply. Consistency in how to diagnose and report biliary complications in OLT is currently lacking. A consensus on how to define and report biliary complications after OLT is urgently needed to guide future clinical trial designs and improve post-OLT outcomes. During an OLT procedure, the donor liver and bile ducts are subjected to unphysiological conditions; following confirmed death of the donor and subsequent organ procurement, the liver is usually transferred to the recipient hospital on ice or using ex situ machine perfusion devices. During procurement and transport, the liver and bile ducts undergo a period of warm and cold ischaemia in case of DCD or cold ischaemia alone for DBD livers. These periods of ischaemia are followed by reperfusion upon completion of the vascular anastomoses in the recipient19. This re-oxygenation during reperfusion after ischaemia causes an influx of cytokines and inflammatory cells in the liver and bile ducts, initiating an extensive wound-healing response20. Within the cells, mitochondria are key effectors of ischaemia–reperfusion injury (IRI). The tricarboxylic acid cycle and electron transport chain arrest during ischaemia, resulting in depletion of ATP and accumulation of succinate and NADH21. Upon reperfusion and, thus, re-introduction of oxygen, the excess of succinate is oxidized at an increased rate stimulating reactive oxygen species (ROS) production by undirected electron transport in mitochondrial complex I21–24. Relative low levels of ROS can be scavenged by antioxidants, maintaining the redox balance, but severe oxidative stress drives the cell into apoptosis or even necrosis25. In case of the latter, damage-associated molecular patterns are released, recruiting immune cells and initiating an inflammatory response26–28. IRI is especially detrimental for cholangiocytes as less antioxidants to scavenge ROS are available in (large) cholangiocytes compared to hepatocytes29–31. This may explain the extensive damage to the biliary surface epithelium after static cold storage; over 90% of the donor livers lose the majority of surface epithelium in the distal extrahepatic bile duct32–35. Longer warm and cold ischaemia times are associated with more severe histological bile duct damage, translating into a higher risk of developing post-transplant cholangiopathy32–34,36,37. This means that the extent of biliary damage during ischaemia—the (still) unavoidable part of OLT—plays a role in the development of biliary complications and especially post-transplant cholangiopathy. It is critical that the bile ducts can regenerate and restore function after OLT; however, if severe biliary damage after IRI results in unsuccessful regeneration and ongoing inflammation, biliary strictures may develop in the recipient. Epithelial regeneration following damage is achieved by the remaining cholangiocytes lining the luminal surface (that is surface epithelium) and those within the submucosa of the large bile ducts. The cholangiocytes within the submucosa are organized in acini clusters38,39, which are called peribiliary glands (PBGs). Cholangiocytes are a highly heterogeneous cell population that display distinct characteristics depending on their localization within the biliary system40–44. Small ductules of the intrahepatic bile ducts are lined by 4–5 cuboidal cholangiocytes per circumference. With the consecutive enlargement of the bile ducts, cholangiocytes become larger in size and more columnar45–47. Following damage of large cholangiocytes, small cholangiocytes can acquire a large cholangiocyte phenotype and replenish them48,49. The molecular pathways driving repair of the biliary tree following IRI are very complex and multiple mechanisms may hamper or prevent adequate restoration of the ducts, favouring fibrosis as opposed to regeneration. One important factor influencing biliary regeneration is cellular senescence50,51, which is defined as irreversible cell cycle arrest accompanied by a characteristic change in phenotype52. Recently, it was shown that biliary cellular senescence compromised adequate biliary regeneration in the setting of OLT. Cellular senescence was triggered in cholangiocytes during experimental liver cold storage, which negatively affected cholangiocyte proliferation. Administration of a senolytic drug prior to cold storage preserved biliary architecture and improved biliary regeneration36,51. Cholangiocyte regeneration and function require a sufficient oxygen supply53. The cholangiocytes’ vascular supply depends on the integrity of the peribiliary plexus arising from the hepatic artery54. IRI can cause damage to the peribiliary vascular plexus resulting in subintimal oedema or arteriolo-necrosis33. Furthermore, ischaemia can lead to fibrin deposition in the peribiliary vascular plexus55–57 and thus impair regeneration. Using D-dimer flush out during ex situ normothermic machine perfusion as a surrogate for fibrin depositions, it has been shown that D-dimer levels correlate with the duration of cold ischaemia in DBD liver grafts and also with poor transplant outcomes56,57. High D-dimer levels are also associated with the development of biliary complications57. The importance of microvascular fibrin deposits in biliary complications development is further supported by the observation, that livers being subjected to fibrinolytic treatment have lower post-transplant cholangiopathy rates, suggesting fibrinolysis as a new strategy to improve post-OLT outcomes57. As PBGs are often the only cholangiocyte compartment in the (distal) extrahepatic bile ducts that survive severe IRI (thus tasked with regenerating the lost cholangiocytes58), the PBG niche has been studied in more detail to understand the pathophysiology of biliary complications. PBGs differ from the cholangiocytes in the surface epithelium in at least location, morphology, and metabolism. The deeper location in the submucosa protects PBGs from the harsh luminal environment including toxic bile salts. In addition, their glycolytic metabolism, in contrast to an oxidative metabolism, renders them relatively resistant to hypoxia53. PBGs produce vascular endothelial growth factor upon ischaemia that promotes PBG as well as endothelial cell expansion59. Extensive damage to the endothelium or peribiliary vascular occlusion by fibrin thrombi interferes with this physiological mechanism, leading to ongoing local hypoxia which prevents adequate epithelial regeneration53. Of note, during this period of biliary wound healing, serum markers for biliary obstruction such as gamma glutaryl transferase (GT), alkaline phosphatase and direct bilirubin can fluctuate indicating active regeneration60. If restoration of the protective surface epithelium is delayed or impaired, toxic bile may enter the biliary submucosa, aggravating damage61–63. Under physiological circumstances, biliary epithelium modifies bile and promotes bile flow by the secretion of water and bicarbonate64. Bicarbonate secretion is extremely important to maintain an alkaline milieu apical of the cholangiocyte layer. Adult cholangiocytes carry a glycocalyx on their apical membrane that can trap bicarbonate molecules 65. Bicarbonate deprotonates toxic hydrophobic bile salts and thereby provides a chemical barrier to protect the biliary surface epithelium; this is called the ‘bicarbonate umbrella’66. One important electrolyte transporter involved in maintenance of the bicarbonate umbrella is the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), which secretes chloride into the bile. Chloride is subsequently reabsorbed in exchange for bicarbonate by the anion exchange pump 2 (AE2). Hypoxia has been shown to decrease CFTR activity in cholangiocyte organoids, suggesting impairment of the bicarbonate umbrella following ischaemia, which could aggravate biliary injury67. Another protective mechanism against toxic hydrophobic bile salts is the formation of mixed micelles consisting of both hydrophobic bile salts and phospholipids68. After OLT, the bile salt export pump (secretion of bile salts) and multidrug resistance 3 (MDR3, secretion of phospholipids) transporters both need time to recover, albeit MDR3 recovers at a slower pace resulting in a high bile salt-to-phospholipid (BS/PL) ratio directly after OLT61–63. A high BS/PL ratio results in increased levels of free hydrophobic bile salt monomers, exposing cholangiocytes (or bare submucosa at places where the adult surface epithelium is not yet recovered) to cytotoxic bile. The significance of this mechanism is demonstrated by the positive correlations between an increased BS/PL ratio, longer ischaemia times, severe histological damage, and the development of post-transplant cholangiopathy61–63. The above mechanisms suggest that severe biliary damage may result in a cholangiocyte pool that is either too small to adequately regenerate and/or dysfunctional by senescence, ongoing local hypoxia, peribiliary vascular occlusion, or bile salt toxicity promoting scarring and strictures over epithelial regeneration (Fig. 1, Table 1). Factors contributing to the development of post-transplant cholangiopathy During the procurement and transplant process cholangiocytes are exposed to ischaemia-mediated injury resulting in damage to mitochondria and the subsequent release of reactive oxygen species (ROS). If ROS can’t be scavenged by antioxidants, cholangiocytes can become apoptotic or necrotic and contribute to inflammatory processes by releasing cytokines a. The majority of (distal) cholangiocytes suffers profound damage during the liver transplant process. Lost surface epithelium needs to be repaired by the surviving cholangiocyte population. The regenerative capacity of the remaining cholangiocytes is negatively impacted by factors such as cellular senescence, an irreversible cell cycle arrest preventing cholangiocyte proliferation and contributing to inflammation b, and local hypoxia caused by damage to the peribiliary vascular plexus c. If the restoration of the surface epithelium is impaired, increased bile toxicity and collapse of the bicarbonate umbrella aggravate biliary injury d, triggering an ongoing wound-healing response which results in fibrosis and stricturing. Mechanisms underlying the development of post-transplant cholangiopathy Decrease of the biliary regenerative capacity: ˚Extensive biliary damage leaving only a small number of viable cholangiocytes after OLT ˚Damage to the peribiliary glands, vascular plexus and supporting stroma ˚Severe cholangiocyte senescence Ongoing biliary injury: ˚Continued local hypoxia due to damage to or occlusion of the vascular plexus ˚Bile salt toxicity ABO-incompatibility Immune-related hepatobiliary diseases such as auto-immune hepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis Donor CMV infection A mutation in chemokine receptor CCR5 Decrease of the biliary regenerative capacity: ˚Extensive biliary damage leaving only a small number of viable cholangiocytes after OLT ˚Damage to the peribiliary glands, vascular plexus and supporting stroma ˚Severe cholangiocyte senescence Ongoing biliary injury: ˚Continued local hypoxia due to damage to or occlusion of the vascular plexus ˚Bile salt toxicity ABO-incompatibility Immune-related hepatobiliary diseases such as auto-immune hepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis Donor CMV infection A mutation in chemokine receptor CCR5 CCR5, C-C chemokine receptor type 5; CMV, cytomegalovirus; OLT, orthotopic liver transplantation. Mechanisms underlying the development of post-transplant cholangiopathy Decrease of the biliary regenerative capacity: ˚Extensive biliary damage leaving only a small number of viable cholangiocytes after OLT ˚Damage to the peribiliary glands, vascular plexus and supporting stroma ˚Severe cholangiocyte senescence Ongoing biliary injury: ˚Continued local hypoxia due to damage to or occlusion of the vascular plexus ˚Bile salt toxicity ABO-incompatibility Immune-related hepatobiliary diseases such as auto-immune hepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis Donor CMV infection A mutation in chemokine receptor CCR5 Decrease of the biliary regenerative capacity: ˚Extensive biliary damage leaving only a small number of viable cholangiocytes after OLT ˚Damage to the peribiliary glands, vascular plexus and supporting stroma ˚Severe cholangiocyte senescence Ongoing biliary injury: ˚Continued local hypoxia due to damage to or occlusion of the vascular plexus ˚Bile salt toxicity ABO-incompatibility Immune-related hepatobiliary diseases such as auto-immune hepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis Donor CMV infection A mutation in chemokine receptor CCR5 CCR5, C-C chemokine receptor type 5; CMV, cytomegalovirus; OLT, orthotopic liver transplantation. Post-transplant cholangiopathy that occurs more than one year after OLT has been associated with immune-mediated injuries rather than ischaemia69. It often involves the smaller bile duct branches in the periphery as opposed to the larger ducts. Multiple immune-related variables were correlated with this late-type post-transplant cholangiopathy; ABO-incompatibility70,71, immune-related hepatobiliary diseases such as autoimmune hepatitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis, donor cytomegalovirus infection, and a mutation in chemokine receptor CCR572,73 (Table 1). Low levels of antioxidants render cholangiocytes especially vulnerable to ischaemia–reperfusion injury. The majority of biliary epithelium suffers profound damage during the transplant process. It is critical that the bile ducts can regenerate and restore function following transplantation into the recipient. Ischaemia induces fibrin deposition in the peribiliary vascular plexus causing local stromal infarcts, damaging epithelium and peribiliary glands Multiple mechanisms may prevent adequate restoration of the ducts favouring fibrosis as opposed to regeneration. About 25% of liver transplant recipients develop anastomotic strictures5,74,75. These strictures are thought to result from factors related to the procedure76. Anastomotic strictures can be divided into early (within 6 months post-OLT) and late anastomotic strictures (after 6 months post-OLT)77. Almost 70% of anastomotic strictures present as early anastomotic strictures, a cause poor anastomotic strictures occur at a in and may result from local ischaemia at the of the anastomosis preventing adequate regeneration and the formation of a It is therefore critical to of the ducts that they are by sufficient during the transplant to the vascular factors that may contribute to the formation of an anastomotic are a size of the donor and recipient hepatic artery thrombosis, anastomotic bile leakage, or a liver transplantation using a graft or a liver from a factors cause either local ischaemia the increased biliary damage, or size between the ducts, leading to regeneration and After the rounds of online and a subsequent online the agreed on the following recommendations for and reporting biliary complications. As it can be challenging to biliary complications of different the that the term post-transplant cholangiopathy be used for biliary complications not affecting the anastomotic Post-transplant then further be divided into intrahepatic and post-transplant cholangiopathy (Fig. The is defined as the of the biliary tree up to not of biliary complications following liver transplantation Biliary complications affecting the anastomotic be as anastomotic or other post-OLT complications related to the biliary tree such as cystic and bile ducts be and not in the biliary complications reporting biliary complications the type of biliary be The of complications be Biliary complications be according to their localization in the biliary The as part of this consensus meeting post-transplant cholangiopathy; to between post-transplant cholangiopathy; to between Anastomotic anastomotic complications be as anastomotic strictures or Biliary complications such as cystic or bile ducts be and not be into the general biliary complications The type of biliary be complications and primary sclerosing autoimmune hepatitis as an for liver transplantation be The of of biliary complications be as well as the time of OLT to general post-OLT biliary complications be according to their clinical The a modified for post-OLT biliary complications that could in reporting and facilitate future clinical trial (Fig. for of biliary complications following liver transplantation Biliary complications be with their location post-transplant post-transplant anastomotic and according to a classification. on and Biliary complications medical treatment Biliary complications or and biliary than Biliary complications re-transplantation death due to biliary complications for be for on or in liver function for which additional was To facilitate clinical trial the assessment of the biliary complications rate at months This is based on the that by months post-OLT the majority of has longer intervals increase the of immune-related complications such as recurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis as biliary complications. The biliary complication during the months post-OLT be In addition, in case of longer the biliary complication the time be The rate of biliary complications be months liver transplant The biliary that within the months liver transplant be To consensus on the for the of biliary complications rounds of were the consensus was that the standard for of biliary complications. As standard and between hospital of at different time of high it was agreed that is to the of biliary complications following OLT. The standard for of biliary complications is as and standard between at a is to the of biliary complications following liver complications can lead to the development of biliary strictures and therefore be prior to biliary complication complication be reporting biliary complication Similarly, complications low flow and can contribute to biliary complications development and therefore be and be prior to the of biliary complications. As it can be to between recurrent and the reporting the of or other immune-related diseases in the recipient population. complications be prior to the of biliary complications. recurrence of or be it can be to between recurrent and liver transplant the of and other immune-related diseases in the recipient population be The have to The report of not and