Background: In recent years, liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular cancers and cirrhosis has been restricted to those with small cancers (<5 cm for solitary and <3 cm for multifocal HCC with <3 nodules). The selection of patients for liver transplantation is based on pre-operative imaging. The accuracy of imaging correlated with explant histology and the effect of tumour stage has not been evaluated in this selected population. Methods: In this study, prospectively collected data for 30 patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation for cirrhosis complicated by small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at a single centre have been reviewed with the aim of correlating radiological findings, explant histology and patient outcome. Patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation between 1995 and 1999 had plain and contrast-enhanced dual-phase spiral CT (DCT) scans of the liver. Patients suspected of having HCC on CT scan or due to elevated serum alpha-fetoprotein underwent iodized oil CT (IOCT). Following transplantation, the explanted liver was serially sectioned at 10-mm intervals and examined by a pathologist blinded to the results of imaging. Data collected prospectively on imaging and histology were compared with outcome data. The median period of follow-up was 1,139 days (range 690–1,955 days) after transplantation. All patients were followed up by clinical assessment, assessment of serum alpha-protein levels and imaging when indicated. Results: All the patients transplanted fulfilled the selective criteria on the basis of imaging (solitary HCC <5 cm in diameter or multifocal HCC <3 cm in diameter with <3 nodules). Of the 30 patients transplanted, 46 HCCs were detected on explant histology with a median size of 24 mm (range 6–75 mm). Ten patients had multifocal disease (median number of lesions 2, range 2–4). No significant difference was observed between IOCT and DCT with regards to the sensitivity (67.4 vs. 68%) and specificity (78.97 vs. 88.6%) of detecting HCCs. IOCT had a positive predictive value of 78.9% as compared to 82.8% for DCT. IOCT had an overall sensitivity of 40% as compared to 30% for DCT in detecting multifocal disease (not significant). Histological assessment of the explanted livers showed that 8 patients had well-, 17 moderate and 5 poorly differentiated HCCs. Tumour size and the presence of multifocal disease did not influence survival in this study. Microvascular invasion was more common with larger tumours (from 38% with lesions less than 40 mm in diameter to 60% with lesions >40 mm in diameter; p < 0.01) and with moderately (29.4%) or poorly differentiated (60%) HCCs than well-differentiated HCC (12.5%) (p < 0.04 and 0.01 for well- vs. moderately and poorly differentiated HCC, respectively). Microvascular invasion on explant histology was associated with poor survival. Of the 17 transplant recipients without vascular invasion, 15 were alive at 1 and 2 years in comparison to 7 of 9 with microscopic vascular invasion (p < 0.01). Four patients died in the post-transplant period due to recurrent HCC. Overall survival [after excluding early post-transplant sepsis-induced deaths (n = 4)] at 1 year was 83.3%. Conclusions: Selective criteria for transplantation of HCC in cirrhosis are associated with a 1-year and 3-year survival rate of 73.3% (including early post-transplant sepsis-induced deaths). IOCT and DCT are similar in their ability to detect unifocal or multifocal HCC. Tumour size and number are not predictive of recurrence with these selective criteria, but microscopic vascular invasion is a bad prognostic factor.

Koneru B, Cassavilla A, Bowman J, Iwatsuki S, Starzl TE: Liver transplantation for malignant tumors. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 1988;17:177–193.
Ringe B, Wittekind C, Bechstein WO, Buzendahl H, Pichalmayr R: The role of liver transplantation in hepatobiliary malignancy. A retrospective analysis of 95 patients with particular regard to tumor stage and recurrence. Ann Surg 1989;209:88–98.
Olthoff KM, Millis JM, Rosove MH, Glodstein LI, Ramming KP, Busuttil R: Is liver transplantation justified for the treatment of hepatic malignancies? Arch Surg 1990;125:1261–1266.
Bismuth LH, Chiche L, Adam R, Castaing D, Diamond T, Dennison A: Liver resection versus transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients. Ann Surg 1993;227:145–151.
O’Grady JG, Polson RJ, Rolles K, Calne RY, Williams R: Liver transplantation for malignant disease. Results in 93 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 1988;207:373–379.
O’Grady JG, Johnson PJ, Zaman S, Calne RY, Williams R: Decreased rate of growth of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation in patients maintained on cyclosporine immunosuppression. Transplant Proc 1988;20:394–396.
Carr B, Kar S: An assay for hepatoma micrometastases: Albumin gene expression in peripheral blood from patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (abstract). Hepatology 1991;14:108A.
McPeake JR, O’Grady JG, Zaman S, et al: Liver transplantation for primary hepatocellular carcinoma: Tumor size and number determine outcome. J Hepatol 1993;18:226–234.
Mazzaferro V, Regalia E, Doci R, et al: Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 1996;334:693–699.
Jonas S, Bechstein WO, Steinmuller T, et al: Vascular invasion and histopathologic grading determine outcome after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis. Hepatology 2001;33:1080–1086.
Bizollon T, Rode A, Bancel B, et al: Diagnostic value and tolerance of lipiodol-computed tomography for the detection of small hepatocellular carcinoma: Correlation with pathologic examination of explanted livers. J Hepatol 1998;28:491–496.
Taourel PG, Pageaux GP, Coste V, et al: Small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients undergoing liver transplantation: Detection with CT after injection of iodized oil. Radiology 1995;197:377–380.
Ngan H: Lipiodol computerized tomography: How sensitive and specific is the technique in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma? Br J Radiol 1990;63:771–775.
Demetris AJ, Jaffe R, Starzl TE: A review of adult and pediatric post-transplant liver pathology. Pathol Annu 1987;22:347–386.
Terminology of nodular hepatocellular lesions. International Working Party. Hepatology 1995;22:983–993.
Spreafico C, Marchiano A, Mazzaferro V, et al: Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients who undergo liver transplantation: Sensitivity of CT with iodized oil. Radiology 1997;203:457–460.
Saada J, Bhattacharjya S, Dhillon AP, et al: Detection of small hepatocellular carcinomas in cirrhotic livers using iodised oil computed tomography. Gut 1997;41:404–407.
Lee HM, Lu DSK, Krasny RM, Busuttil R, Kadell B, Lucas J: Hepatic lesion characterization in cirrhosis: Significance of arterial hypervascularity on dual-phase helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:125–130.
Freeny PC, Grossholz M, Kaakaji K, Schmiedl UP: Significance of hyperattenuating and contrast-enhancing hepatic nodules detected in the cirrhotic liver during arterial phase helical CT in pre-liver transplant patients: Radiologic-histopathologic correlation of explanted livers. Abdom Imaging 2003;28:333–346.
Fasani P, Sangiovanni A, Fazio C, et al: High prevalence of multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis attributable to multiple risk factors. Hepatology 1999;29:1704–1707.
Esnaola NF, Lauwers GY, Mirza NQ, et al: Predictors of microvascular invasion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who are candidates for orthotopic liver transplantation. J Gastrointest Surg 2002;6:224–232.
Lauwers GY, Terris B, Balis UJ, et al: Prognostic histologic indicators of curatively resected hepatocellular carcinomas: A multi-institutional analysis of 425 patients with definition of a histologic prognostic index. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:25–34.
Teefey SA, Hildeboldt CC, Dehdashti F, et al: Detection of primary hepatic malignancy in liver transplant candidates: Prospective comparison of CT, MR imaging, US, and PET. Radiology 2003;226:533–542.
Llovet JM, Bustamante J, Castells A, et al: Natural history of untreated nonsurgical hepatocellular carcinoma: Rationale for the design and evaluation of therapeutic trials. Hepatology 1999;29:62–67.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.