Living donor liver transplantation--adult donor outcomes: a systematic review

Revolutionizing Organ Transplantation With Robotic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of robotic techniques on organ transplantation outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The evolution of organ transplantation is becoming influenced by the adoption of minimally invasive techniques, transitioning from laparoscopic to robotic methods. Robotic surgery has emerged as a significant advancement, providing superior precision and outcomes compared with traditional approaches.

METHODS

This perspective includes a systematic review of the literature, original data from a high-volume center, as well as an international survey focusing on perceptions related to robotic versus laparoscopic and open approaches.

RESULTS

The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed lower morbidity with robotic donor nephrectomy, recipient kidney transplant and donor hepatectomy. Our center's experience, with over 3000 minimally invasive transplant procedures (kidney, liver, donor, and recipient), supports the superiority of robotic transplant surgery (RTS). The global survey confirms this shift, revealing a preference for robotic approaches due to their reduced morbidity, despite challenges such as access to the robotic system and cost.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive overview including a systematic review, original data, and perceptions derived from the international survey demonstrate the superiority of robotic transplant surgery (RTS) across a range of organ transplantations, for both donors and recipients. The future of RTS depends on the efforts of the surgical community in addressing challenges such as economic implications, the need for specialized surgical training for numerous surgeons, as well as wide access to robotic systems worldwide.

Indications and results of right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

The shortage of deceased liver donor organs over the years has always posed the need to expand the donor pool. A viable alternative to deceased donors is that of the living donor. Indeed, the living donor in liver transplantation, initially in pediatric transplantation, but for several years now also in adult transplantation, is a more than viable alternative to deceased liver donation. In fact, right liver lobe donation has proven to be a surgical procedure with low impact on the donor's life in terms of morbidity and mortality, with excellent results in recipients of such organs. In recent years, an increasing number of studies have been published that show excellent results in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation, encouraging this practice not only in countries that have historically had a shortage of deceased donor organs, such as Asian countries, but making it a practice of increasing use in Western countries as well. In addition, thanks to improvements in surgical technique and the experience of high-volume centers, this surgery has also begun to be performed using minimally invasive surgical techniques, allowing us to envision ever better outcomes for both donor and recipient in the coming years.

An Elbow Patch Reconstruction Technique for Narrowed Remnant Portal Veins during Right Lobe Living Donor Hepatectomy: A Rescue Surgery

Background: Treatment of established portal vein narrowing after living donor hepatectomy is challenging. We aimed to present a new approach termed the "elbow patch reconstruction technique" to correct the narrowed remnant portal vein just or late after right lobe living donor hepatectomy. Methods: Demographic and clinical data of 12 living liver donors with narrowed remnant portal veins and treated with the "elbow patch reconstruction technique" were prospectively collected and retrospectively evaluated. Anatomic variation of the portal vein was defined in accordance with the Nakamura classification; six of the living liver donors had type A, three had type B, and the remaining three had type C. In eight of the living liver donors with a narrowed remnant portal vein, diagnosis was detected by intraoperative Doppler ultrasonography and visual inspection by experienced transplant surgeons in the living donor hepatectomy procedure. In the remaining four living liver donors, diagnosis was performed postoperatively when elevation of liver enzymes was noticed during the routine liver function test and Doppler US. The diagnosis was confirmed by multidetector computed tomography. Results: Data from nine males and three females aged 18 to 54 years were analyzed. All of the living liver donors were followed up for a median of 1710 days (min-max: 1178-4447 days; IQR: 1516 days), and none of the living liver donors had any structural or functional complications in the portal vein. Conclusions: Narrowing remnant portal veins are rare, but they are a life-threatening complication in living liver donors, and this condition requires urgent management. Image guided interventions and narrowed segment resection with end-to-end anastomosis using a vascular graft carried a potential risk for thrombosis and restenosis. To avoid these complications, we shared a technique named "elbow patch reconstruction technique". This technique can be very effective in relieving the narrowing of the remnant portal vein after right lobe living donor hepatectomy.

The incidence of adverse outcome in donors after living donor liver transplantation: A meta-analysis of 60,829 donors

The scarcity of liver grafts has prompted developments in living donor liver transplantations (LDLT), with previous literature illustrating similar outcomes in recipients compared to deceased donor transplants. However, significant concerns regarding living donor morbidity and mortality have yet to be examined comprehensively. This study aims to provide estimates of the incidence of various outcomes in living liver donors. In this meta-analysis, Medline and Embase were searched from inception to July 2022 for articles assessing the incidence of outcomes in LDLT donors. Complications in the included studies were classified into respective organ systems. Analysis of incidence was conducted using a generalized linear mixed model with Clopper-Pearson intervals. Eighty-seven articles involving 60,829 living liver donors were included. The overall pooled incidence of complications in LDLT donors was 24.7% (CI: 21.6%-28.1%). The incidence of minor complications was 17.3% (CI: 14.7%-20.3%), while the incidence of major complications was lower at 5.5% (CI: 4.5%-6.7%). The overall incidence of donor mortality was 0.06% (CI: 0.0%-0.1%) in 49,027 individuals. Psychological complications (7.6%, CI: 4.9%-11.5%) were the most common among LDLT donors, followed by wound-related (5.2%, CI: 4.4%-6.2%) and respiratory complications (4.9%, CI: 3.8%-6.3%). Conversely, cardiovascular complications had the lowest incidence among the subgroups at 0.8% (CI: 0.4%-1.3%). This study presents the incidence of post-LDLT outcomes in living liver donors, illustrating significant psychological, wound-related, and respiratory complications. While significant advancements in recent decades have contributed towards decreased morbidity in living donors, our findings call for targeted measures and continued efforts to ensure the safety and quality of life of liver donors post-LDLT.

Human Healthcare and Its Pharmacy Component from a Safety Point of View

Healthcare plays a crucial role in public and national safety as a significant part of state activity and a component of national safety, whose mission is to organize and ensure affordable medical care for the population. The four stages of the genesis of healthcare safety development with the corresponding safety models of formation were defined: technical, human factor or security management, systemic security management, and cognitive complexity. It was established that at all stages, little attention is paid to the issues of the formation of the pharmaceutical sector's safety. Taking into account the development of safety models that arise during the four stages of the genesis of safety science, we have proposed a model of the evolution of pharmaceutical safety formation. At the same time, future research is proposed to focus on new holistic concepts of safety, such as "Safety II", evaluation and validation methods, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, where the development of this topic remained in the second stage of the evolution of science, the search for pharmaceutical errors related to drugs.

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Effects of Livact Granule on Liver Function Recovery After Donor Right Hemi-Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is currently widespread due to organ shortage. Because LDLT is a high-risk surgery for the donor, donor safety becomes an important issue. In adult LDLT, right lobe grafts are usually used, posing a greater risk to the donor than a left lobe. Reports have demonstrated that branched-chain amino acids help patients recover after hepatectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of Livact granule on donor safety and recovery.

METHODS

From January 2016 to December 2021, LDLT was performed on 258 patients at our center. Among them, 148 were in the non-Livact group, and 110 were in the Livact group. Six of 110 patients in the Livact group stopped taking the granules due to nausea and vomiting, leaving 104 patients in the Livact group to be analyzed. Various preoperative and postoperative factors were evaluated to assess donor safety and recovery.

RESULTS

In the non-Livact group, the mean donor age was 35.8; in the Livact group, it was 40. There were no differences between the 2 groups in preoperative liver function tests and no difference in future liver remnant or steatosis. There was no difference in total bilirubin level between the 2 groups at 5 days postoperatively; however, in the Livact group, the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was lower, and albumin was higher. The days taken for total bilirubin to normalize were the same in both groups, but fewer days were needed for Livact to realize an international normalized ratio. More patients in the non-Livact group were discharged with the Jackson-Pratt drain because the drainage did not decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

In donor right hepatectomy patients, taking Livact granules and branched-chain amino acids helps donor recovery. For donor safety, administration of Livact granules during the perioperative period should be considered.

Effect of Donors' Biliary Variation on Postoperative Biliary Complications in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Observational Study in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Our study aims to evaluate the biliary anatomy variation according to the Varotti classification and its correlation with surgical outcomes for both donors and recipients undergoing living donor liver transplants (LDLTs).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 150 LDLT cases performed at a single center in Vietnam with preoperative radiologic evaluations and intraoperative surgical assessments to identify biliary variant anatomy. Postoperative biliary complications were documented and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed to determine any significant associations between biliary variations and post-transplant outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty cases of LDLT at 108 Military Central Hospital from October 2017 to December 2022 were included in our study. Among the donors, the mean age was 30.89 ± 7.23, with male predominance (77.3%). The prevalence of type 1 biliary anatomy was 84.67%. Type 2, 3a, 3b, 4a, and 4b accounted for 5.33%, 2.67%, 5.33%, 0.67%, and 1.33% of cases, respectively. Donors' complications were witnessed in 7 cases (4.67%), and all needed intervention (Clavien-Dindo grade 3). Biliary complications were found in 36 (24.0%) recipients, with 22 (14.67%) cases of biliary stenosis and 16 (10.67%) cases of biliary leak, including 2 cases encountering both complications. Age, gender, graft type, preoperative liver function, biliary variant anatomy, number of graft orifices, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and blood loss were not significant risk factors for recipients' biliary complications. Cold ischemia time significantly increased the biliary complication rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that biliary variant anatomy is common in living liver donors. Such variations should not be a contraindication to liver donation. However, accurate pre- and intraoperative radiologic and surgical evaluations are fundamental for a careful reconstruction plan.

Novel Benchmark for Adult-to-Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: Integrating Eastern and Western Experiences

OBJECTIVE

To define benchmark values for adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

BACKGROUND

LDLT utilizes living-donor hemiliver grafts to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist mortality. Although references have been established for donor hepatectomy, no such information exists for recipients to enable conclusive quality and comparative assessments.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LDLT were analyzed in 15 high-volume centers (≥10 cases/year) from 3 continents over 5 years (2016-2020), with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Benchmark criteria included a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≤20, no portal vein thrombosis, no previous major abdominal surgery, no renal replacement therapy, no acute liver failure, and no intensive care unit admission. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of all centers' medians.

RESULTS

Of 3636 patients, 1864 (51%) qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs, including posttransplant dialysis (≤4%), primary nonfunction (≤0.9%), nonanastomotic strictures (≤0.2%), graft loss (≤7.7%), and redo-liver transplantation (LT) (≤3.6%), at 1-year were below the deceased donor LT benchmarks. Bile leak (≤12.4%), hepatic artery thrombosis (≤5.1%), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI ® ) (≤56) were above the deceased donor LT benchmarks, whereas mortality (≤9.1%) was comparable. The right hemiliver graft, compared with the left, was associated with a lower CCI ® score (34 vs 21, P < 0.001). Preservation of the middle hepatic vein with the right hemiliver graft had no impact neither on the recipient nor on the donor outcome. Asian centers outperformed other centers with CCI ® score (21 vs 47, P < 0.001), graft loss (3.0% vs 6.5%, P = 0.002), and redo-LT rates (1.0% vs 2.5%, P = 0.029). In contrast, non-benchmark low-volume centers displayed inferior outcomes, such as bile leak (15.2%), hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2%), or redo-LT (6.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark LDLT offers a valuable alternative to reduce waitlist mortality. Exchange of expertise, public awareness, and centralization policy are, however, mandatory to achieve benchmark outcomes worldwide.

Multiple Facets of Cellular Homeostasis and Regeneration of the Mammalian Liver

Liver regeneration occurs in response to diverse injuries and is capable of functionally reestablishing the lost parenchyma. This phenomenon has been known since antiquity, encapsulated in the Greek myth where Prometheus was to be punished by Zeus for sharing the gift of fire with humanity by having an eagle eat his liver daily, only to have the liver regrow back, thus ensuring eternal suffering and punishment. Today, this process is actively leveraged clinically during living donor liver transplantation whereby up to a two-thirds hepatectomy (resection or removal of part of the liver) on a donor is used for transplant to a recipient. The donor liver rapidly regenerates to recover the lost parenchymal mass to form a functional tissue. This astonishing regenerative process and unique capacity of the liver are examined in further detail in this review.

Selection of Safe Donors for Living Donor Liver Transplant Using Extended Right Lobe Graft

Extended right lobectomy (ERL) for living donor liver transplant (LDLT) is selectively performed in many transplant centers and has shown excellent recipient outcomes as reported in previous studies. Yet, there is no universally accepted indication for ERL in respect to donor safety. Current study was designed to stratify risk factors of adverse donor outcome after ERL. A total of 79 living donors who underwent ERL for LDLT were included in analysis. Donors were classified as safety and hazard donor groups according to postoperative findings relevant to posthepatectomy liver failure classification by the International Study Group for Liver Surgery. On multivariable analysis, left lateral section volume <20% of total liver volume and nonpreservation of segment 4a venous drainage were the independent risk factors impairing postoperative outcomes. Despite the short-term impairment of liver function in hazard donor groups, all donors recovered and showed satisfactory remnant liver regeneration. However, these findings have implications in establishing selection criteria of donors eligible for ERL donation. In conclusion, LDLT using ERL graft can be safely performed provided so that left lateral section volume/total donor liver is ≥20% besides conventional donor selection criteria. Also, efforts to preserve segment 4a vein must be made in performing ERL graft procurement in LDLT donors.

Liver Paired Exchange: Programmatic Hopes and Fears

The dearth of deceased liver donors has created a supply demand gap, necessitating creation of living donor liver transplantation. However, living donor liver transplantation has relied on directed donation, whereby many potential directed donors are rejected based on ABO blood group incompatibility, hepatic size incompatibility, or the need for biliary or arterial reconstruction during transplant surgery. Much like kidney paired exchange, liver paired exchange (LPE) circumvents these incompatibility issues by relying on anonymous, nondirected, or bridge donors that are better anatomical or histological matches for recipients. Although Asia has taken the lead in LPE, the process has only recently been adopted in North America, with the first successful surgery done in the United States in 2019. Our review article sheds light on the process of LPE and the success of LPE in the United States thus far and, additionally, highlights the several logistical and ethical challenges that must be considered as transplant centers adopt and scale up LPE across the United States to address the increased demand for liver allografts.

Characterization of hepatic steatosis using controlled attenuation parameter and MRI-derived proton density fat fraction in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The increasingly favorable outcomes of live donor liver transplant warrant development of screening techniques to expand current donor pool. Transient elastography (TE) with controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is accessible and has promising diagnostic performance in non-obese individuals. Here, we demonstrate its utility in grading donor steatosis for risk assessment in living liver donors (LLD).

STUDY DESIGN

In a prospective study of LLD and recipients, accuracy was determined using MRI-derived proton density fat fraction (PDFF) as reference.

RESULTS

One hundred and one LLD underwent TE, 95 of whom had available PDFF. Median CAP and MRI-PDFF were 233 dB/m (206-270) and 2.9% (2.3-4.0), respectively. A CAP threshold of 270 dB/m captured all steatosis which was present in 13 (13%) LLD (AUROC .942, 100% sensitivity and 83% specificity). Performance further improved when excluding obese LLD and limiting analysis to M-probe (AUROC .971 and .974, respectively, with 87% specificity). There was no difference in CAP and MRI-PDFF between LLD and nondonors (P = .26 and .21, respectively). Early allograft dysfunction was observed in one recipient (CAP 316, PDFF 9.5%), zero underwent retransplant, and one died from sepsis.

CONCLUSION

The specific role of CAP in living liver donation warrants further study, beginning with its use as screening tool across peripheral clinics.

Does living liver donors' underestimation about surgical outcomes impact on their health-related quality of life after donation?: a descriptive cross-sectional study

Background

In South Korea, the number of living-donor liver transplantations in 2019 was 1,188. Living liver donors (LLDs) undergo surgery and the postoperative recovery process for altruistic purposes. This study explored LLDs’ unmet expectations about surgical outcomes and examined their impact on the donors’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

Methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study utilized a self-reported survey. Data were collected at a university hospital in Seoul, South Korea. Among the 535 LLDs who underwent surgery for donation between January 2011 and March 2021, 124 participated in this study. The Korean version of the 12-item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2) was used to measure the HRQOL of LLDs. Unmet expectations regarding surgical outcomes were measured using four items: pain, length of hospital stay, speed of recovery, and complications. Logistic regression model was applied to determine whether the unmet expectations influence HRQOL in LLDs. Odds ratios with 95% confidence interval were used.

Results

The percentage of the participants who reported that their actual experiences for pain, speed of recovery, hospital stay, and complications were worse than expected were 34.7%, 22.6%, 9.7%, and 7.3%, respectively. Unmet expectations about surgical outcomes were significantly associated with physical and mental HRQOL after controlling for age, sex, education level, income, postoperative complications, recipients’ death, time since donation, and satisfaction with the decision to donate.

Conclusion

LLDs should be supported in obtaining more accurate and realistic information about surgical outcomes to decrease unmet expectations, which may help improve their quality of life.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12955-022-02055-0.

Long-term renal and cardiovascular outcome of living kidney donors: A single-center retrospective observation study

Background

The nephrectomy for donation reduces the renal parenchyma and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). It is important to understand the clinical consequences of kidney donation by a living donor.

Methods

In this single-center, observational, retrospective study, we defined the renal and cardiovascular outcomes of living kidney donors. We analyzed data of 124 donors who donated at the Kidney Transplant Center (TC) of Bari between February 2002 and December 2018. Biometric data collected at visit 0, that is, at the time of the study of the donor candidate, and at visit 1, or rather at the last nephrological checkup (October-2018/August-2019) were compared.

Results

An overall drop in GFR of 29 mL/min was observed over the analyzed period of 81+/-59 months. At visit 1, two donors developed chronic renal failure, including one in ESKD who underwent a kidney transplant. No relationship between age at donation and GFR drop was found. A trend toward an increase in obese people was reported; 28% of patients had compensated dyslipidemia and 35% were treated for hypertension. During the follow-up time, 3% had major cardiovascular events and 24% were lost to follow-up. One patient died.

Conclusion

The age of the donor does not represent a basic element for reducing GFR or for the occurrence of major cardiovascular events. Furthermore, older donor candidates, in optimal health, should not be excluded from the donation. It is important to promote careful and timely follow-up of the donor, preventing the most common clinical consequences of nephrectomy, in consideration of the poor compliance of a large part of donors over the long-term post-donation period.

Reducing Risk for Acute Kidney Injury After Living Donor Hepatectomy by Protocolized Fluid Restriction: Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a potential complication after restricted fluid therapy for major surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of AKI for living liver donor hepatectomy in which applied intraoperative protocolized fluid restriction was used targeting a low central venous pressure (CVP) level with high pulse pressure variation (PPV) and systolic pressure variation (SPV).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Living liver donors were admitted for this retrospective observational study. Low CVP <5 mm Hg with high PPV<20% and SPV<15% were the targets of the clinical protocol to reduce intraoperative blood loss via protocolized fluid management until the end of the hepatic parenchymal division. KDIGO criteria were used for AKI definition. The SPSS version 11.5 program was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 130 patients, 79 (60.8%) men and 51 (39.2%) women, with from 18 to 58 years of age. Donors underwent right and left lobe hepatectomies (116 and 14, respectively). The baseline CVP, the lowest CVP of hepatectomy, and the highest CVP measured after hepatectomy were 7.45 ± 2.41, 4.28 ± 1.12, 7.67 ± 2.09 mm Hg, respectively. Only 4 patients with right lobe hepatectomy developed AKI stage I (3.1%) in the first 24 hours. The 4 patients were recovered at 48 hours postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that a CVP target of <5 mm Hg and high PPV/SPV via a simple fluid management modality with protocolized-fluid restriction until the procurement may not cause AKI in living liver donors in a closed follow-up anesthesia approach.

Textbook outcome among voluntary donors undergoing major living donor hepatectomy

Purpose

Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure of outcome and provides superior assessment of quality of care after surgery. TO after major living donor hepatectomy (MLDH) has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to determine the rate of TO and its associated factors, after MLDH.

Methods

This was a single center retrospective review of living liver donors who underwent MLDH between 2012 and 2021 (n = 1022). The rate of TO and its associated factors was determined.

Results

Among 1022 living donors (of whom 693 [67.8%] were males, median age 26 [range, 18–54] years), TO was achieved in 714 (69.9%) with no donor mortality. Majority of donors met the cutoffs for individual outcome measures: 908 (88.8%) for no major complications, 904 (88.5%) for ICU stay ≤ 2 days, 900 (88.1%) for hospital stay ≤ 10 days, 990 (96.9%) for no perioperative blood transfusion, 1004 (98.2%) for no 30-day re-admission, and 1014 (99.2%) for no post-hepatectomy liver failure. Early donation era (before streamlining of donor operative pathways) was associated with failure to achieve TO [OR 1.4, CI 1.1–1.9, P = 0.006]. TO was achieved in 506/755 (67%) donors in the early donation era versus 208/267 (77.9%) in the later period (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Despite zero mortality and low complication rate, TO was achieved in approximately 70% donors. TO was modifiable and improved with changes in donor operative pathway.

Living donor hepatectomy in medium volume liver transplant centre has comparable outcomes to high volume centres: validation of donabedian quality assurance framework

BACKGROUND

Given the complexity of living donor hepatectomy, it is expected that high hospital volume will better outcomes. This study aims to evaluate post-operative outcomes for living donor hepatectomy in a medium volume liver transplant centre and compare to outcomes in high volume centres. Also, it serves as a validation tool for framework of structure-process-outcome model for safe living donor hepatectomy program.

METHODS

204 donors who underwent donor hepatectomy between June 1996 to September 2019 were reviewed retrospectively and compared to outcomes in high volume centres.

RESULTS

At 6 months, overall donor morbidity rate was 20/204 (9.8%). Wound complications were most common at 5/204 (2.5%). Majority of complications were either Clavien grade 1 or 2 and only 3 donors had Clavien grade 3 complications. There was zero donor mortality.

DISCUSSION

Our centre's donor morbidity rate of 9.8% is the one of the lowest reported in the published literature. With increased experience, stringent donor selection and enhanced perioperative care by a multi-disciplinary team, outcomes in a medium volume centre can match the outcomes reported in high volume centres. The framework for quality in terms of structure, process and outcomes is presented which can be adopted for developing programs.

Surgical complications after living and deceased donor liver transplant: The NSQIP transplant experience

This study used the prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Transplant pilot database to analyze surgical complications after liver transplantation (LT) in LT recipients from 2017-2019. The primary outcome was surgical complication requiring intervention (Clavien-Dindo grade II or greater) within 90 days of transplant. Of the 1684 deceased donor and 109 living donor LT cases included from 29 centers, 38% of deceased donor liver recipients and 47% of living donor liver recipients experienced a complication. The most common complications included biliary complications (19% DDLT; 31% LDLT), hemorrhage requiring reoperation (14% DDLT; 9% LDLT) and vascular complications (6% DDLT; 9% LDLT). Management of biliary leaks (35.3% ERCP, 38.0% percutaneous drainage, 26.3% reoperation) and vascular complications (36.2% angioplasty/stenting, 31.2% medication, 29.8% reoperation) was variable. Biliary (aHR 5.14, 95% CI 2.69-9.8, p<0.001), hemorrhage (aHR 2.54, 95% CI 1.13-5.7, p = 0.024) and vascular (aHR 2.88, 95% CI 0.85-9.7, p = 0.089) complication status at 30-days post-transplant were associated with lower 1-year patient survival. We conclude that biliary, hemorrhagic and vascular complications continue to be significant sources of morbidity and mortality for LT recipients. Understanding the different risk factors for complications between deceased and living donor liver recipients and standardizing complication management represent avenues for continued improvement. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Hepatectomy With/Without Fluorescence-Assisted Technology and Conventional Open Procedure: A Retrospective Study in Mainland China

Background: The application of laparoscopy in donor liver acquisition for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become increasingly popular in the past decade. Indole cyanide green (ICG) fluorescence technique is a new adjuvant method in surgery. The purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic and open surgery in living donor left lateral hepatectomy, and to evaluate the application of ICG in laparoscopy.

Methods: Donors received LDLT for left lateral lobe resection from November 2016 to November 2020 were selected and divided into pure laparoscopy donor hepatectomy (PLDH) group, fluorescence-assisted pure laparoscopy donor hepatectomy (FAPLDH) group and open donor hepatectomy (ODH) group. We compared perioperative data and prognosis of donors and recipients. Quality of life were evaluated by SF-36 questionnaires.

Results: The operation time of PLDH group (169.29 ± 26.68 min) was longer than FAPLDH group (154.34 ± 18.40 min) and ODH group (146.08 ± 25.39 min, p = 0.001). The blood loss was minimum in FAPLDH group (39.48 ± 10.46 mL), compared with PLDH group (52.44 ± 18.44 mL) and ODH group (108.80 ± 36.82 mL, p=0.001). The post-operative hospital stay was longer in PLDH group (5.30 ± 0.98 days) than FAPLDH group (4.81 ± 1.03 days) and ODH group (4.64 ± 1.20 days; p = 0.001). Quality of life of donors undergoing laparoscopic surgery was better.

Conclusion: Laparoscopic approaches for LDLT contribute to less blood loss, better cosmetic satisfaction. The fluorescence technique can further reduce bleeding and shorten operation time. In terms of quality of life, laparoscopic surgery is better than open surgery. Laparoscopy procedure for living-donor procurement with/without fluorescence-assist can be performed as safely as open surgery.

Prognostic Factors of Liver Transplantation for HCC: Comparative Literature Review

PURPOSE

The aim of the review study is investigation of the prognostic factors of the liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

A literature review has been made, especially in countries where dominantly living donor liver transplantation is performed, such as Turkey. Liver transplantation from deceased donor and from living donor has been evaluated about as advantages and disadvantages, and their effects on prognosis have been compared. In addition, hepatocellular carcinoma series of Koç University Liver Transplantation center has been presented.

RESULTS

Liver transplantation is still the best treatment option with 5-year 50% survival rate for hepatocellular carcinoma even in patient who has locally advanced tumor. The patient's survival is not only an important issue but also the living donor's safety is controversial particularly when expectation of recipient's 5-year survival is below 50% due to donor complication.

CONCLUSION

Detailed preoperative examination, appropriate patient selection, and timing of surgery are seen the most important issues in liver transplant's patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Healthcare Resource Utilization After Living Liver Donation: A Retrospective Case-control Study

BACKGROUND

Living liver donation is generally considered safe, but donors may experience short or long-term complications. The purpose of this study was to assess healthcare resource utilization after liver donation in living liver donors in comparison to the general population.

METHODS

Outpatient or emergency department visits and hospital admissions were compared between living liver donors who underwent hepatic resection for living liver donation between 2004 and 2018 and the matched general population. Healthcare resource utilization data for 5 years after liver donation were collected from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database. For every living liver donor, 4 individually matched nondonors were selected from the NHIS database using age, sex, preexisting comorbidities, and previous healthcare utilization history.

RESULTS

A total of 1886 living liver donors and 7309 nondonors were included. In the first year after donation, living liver donors required more outpatient department visits (7 [4-13] vs. 3 [1-7], P < 0.001) and more emergency department visits (13.33% vs. 0.15%, P < 0.001) compared to matched nondonors. A similar trend persisted for 5 years after donation. The number of hospital admissions of living liver donors was higher for up to 2 years after donation with longer hospital length of stay (13.0 [10.5-16.0] vs. 5.0 [3.0-9.0] days, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare resource utilization in living liver donors for 5 years after donation were higher compared to matched nondonors. The higher healthcare resource demand may be related to postoperative complications or lowered threshold for healthcare resource utilization after donation.Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TP/C291.

Long-term Survival of 10,116 Korean Live Liver Donors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term mortality of Korean live liver donors using data from a national donor registry by comparing it with the mortality of the general population.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although live liver donors generally have a healthy status, their long-term mortality has not been properly addressed in a large donor registry.

METHODS

Data of 10,116 live liver donors were drawn from a mandated national registry of Korean live liver donors between 2000 and 2015. Matched controls were selected from the Korean National Health Insurance System-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC). Median (range) follow-up of liver donors was 5.7 (0-15.9) years. Donors were 1:3 individually matched to controls by sex and 5-year age group; potential controls were from the whole NHIS-NSC (Control 1) or from NHIS-NSC after excluding people with contraindications to be organ donors (Control 2) (donor, n = 7538; Control 1, n = 28,248; Control 2, n = 28,248).

RESULTS

Fifty-three deaths occurred after donation. Ten-year cumulative mortality of live liver donors was 0.9%. The most common cause of death was suicide (n = 19) followed by cancer (n = 9) and traffic accident (n = 7). In the matched control analysis, overall risk of death was significantly lower in donors than in Control 1 (P < 0.001), but higher than in Control 2 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver donors have increased long-term mortality risk compared to similar healthy controls without contraindications to be organ donors. Therefore, long-term follow-up, including psychosocial support, is needed for live liver donors.

A Meta-Analysis on the Incidence of Donor Related Depression after Liver Transplant

AIM

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is increasing, yet gaps exist in the understanding of psychological wellbeing of donors after liver transplant. This meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for donor-related depression after liver transplantation.

METHODS

A search was conducted on Medline and Embase database. Articles assessing incidence of depression in LDLT donors were included. Incidence was pooled after Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. For risk factors, dichotomous variables were analyzed with generalized linear model while a conventional meta regression with logit transformation was conducted for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Of 1,069 abstracts, 40 articles underwent full-text review. 17 articles were included. The pooled incidence of depression among 1,888 LT donors was 7.66% (CI: 4.47% - 12.80%). Depression rates were significantly higher in Asian compared to Western studies (RR: 1.73, CI: 1.19 - 2.52, p=0.0039). Female gender (p<0.001), Caucasian ethnicity (p=0.047), employment status (p<0.001) and lower education levels (p=0.044) were significantly associated with depression. Donor relationship with recipients was not a significant risk factor.

CONCLUSIONS

LDLT remains a core aspect of the treatment of end-stage liver disease. However, the high depression rates after LT suggest that there remains room for improvement in the care of donors' mental health post-transplant.

A comparative study of postoperative outcomes between minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy and open living donor hepatectomy: The Korean organ transplantation registry

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy in comparison with the open procedure, using Korean Organ Transplantation Registry data.

METHODS

We reviewed the prospectively collected data of all 1,694 living liver donors (1,071 men, 623 women) who underwent donor hepatectomy between April 2014 and December 2017. The donors were grouped on the basis of procedure type to the minimally invasive procedure group (n = 304) or to the open procedure group (n = 1,390) and analyzed the relationships between clinical data and complications.

RESULTS

No donors died after the procedure. The overall complication rates after operation in the minimally invasive procedure group and the open procedure group were 6.2% and 3.5%, respectively. Biliary complications were the most frequent events in both groups (minimally invasive procedure group, 2.4%; open procedure group, 1.6%). The majority of complications occurred within 7 days after surgery in both groups. The duration of hospitalization was shorter in the minimally invasive procedure group than in the open procedure group (9.04 ± 3.78 days versus 10.29 ± 4.01 days; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Based on its similar outcomes in our study, minimally invasive donor hepatectomy cannot be an alternative option compared with the open procedure method. To overcome this, we need to ensure better surgical safety, such as lower complication rate and shorter duration of hospitalization.

Exploration Into Donor-Recipient Relationship After Living-Donor Liver Transplantation Using Gift-Exchange Theory

AIM

This qualitative study aimed to explore the donor-recipient relationships following living-donor liver transplantation.

METHOD

A 1-time cross-sectional qualitative interview was conducted with liver transplant recipients (n = 17) and living liver donors (n = 11) post-transplant. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed manually by using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the recipients and the donors was 54.41 ± 8.0 (range 39-71) and 36.6 ± 7.69 (range 28-57) years, respectively. Following the interviews, 2 overarching themes emerged: (1) Became care providers, and (2) differentiation in relationships after transplantation. A total of 3 sub-themes were explained under "differentiation in relationships after transplantation;" feeling guilty, becoming closer and more intense owing to a feeling of indebtedness, and putting some distance owing to a feeling of indebtedness.

CONCLUSION

The study focused on the reciprocation stage according to gift-exchange theory. During reciprocation, although recipients expressed positive feelings such as gratitude, closer relationships, and special bonds; they also reported negative feelings like guilt and indebtedness resulting in a purposeful distancing from their donors. Most donors understood what the recipients felt, but they wanted their relationship to return to normal. Married female donors had worse experiences, such as divorce or a weakened marital relationship after donation.

Liver Living Donation for Cancer Patients: Benefits, Risks, Justification

LDLT covers all standard indications for liver transplantation, and the results are similar or even better than for standard DDLT. Due to the donor shortage and long waiting time, LDLT has become a relevant option for patients with liver tumors, provided the expected five-year survival rate is comparable to that of patients receiving a DDLT. Nowadays, LDLT offers the possibility to extend the standard morphometric selection by considering the biological parameters. In the setting of LDLT, we are not only faced with surgical morbidity in the donor, but long-term non-medical problems like psychological complications and financial burden also have to be considered. On the other hand, the benefits to the donor are mainly social and psychological. In LDLT, the donor's altruism is the fundamental ethical principle and it is based on the principles of (1) beneficence (doing good), (2) non-maleficence (avoiding harm), (3) respect for autonomy, and (4) respect for justice (promoting fairness). On top of that, the concept of double equipoise of living organ donation evaluates the relationship between the recipient's need, the donor's risk, and the recipient's outcome. It considers each donor-recipient pair as a unit, analyzing whether the specific recipient's benefit justifies the specific donor's risk in particular oncologic indications. In this light, it is essential to seek adequate informed consent focused on risk, benefits and outcome benefits of both donor and recipient supported by an independent living donor advocate. Finally, the transplant team must protect donors from donation if harm does not justify the expected benefit to the recipient.

Significance of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in assessment of potential living kidney donors

The most recent British Transplant Society (BTS) guidelines recommend that office blood pressure (BP) monitoring in living donors is sufficient for the assessment of hypertension (HTN) and those with BP >140/90 should be further assessed using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). ABPM can detect diurnal and nocturnal variation in BP, thus it can identify masked HTN. The aim of the current study is to assess reliability of ABPM vesus office BP monitoring for assessment in living kidney donors. Office and ABPM of all potential kidney donors at a single center from April 2009 to March 2017 were retrospectively reviewed and compared. Age, sex, body mass index, kidney function, and echocardiography results were collected and analyzed. Two hundred and sixteen kidney donors were stratified based on their BP readings into four groups; group 1 (masked HTN: normotensive in office and hypertensive in ABPM), group 2 (sustained normotension: normotensive in office and in ABPM), group 3 (sustained HTN: hypertensive in office and in ABPM), group 4 (white-coat HTN: hypertensive in office and normotensive in ABPM). Thirteen percent of patients were diagnosed with masked HTN. Office systolic BP monitoring was significantly higher in patients older than 50 years old compared to other younger populations. However, this significant difference in systolic BP was diminished when assessment with ABPM was performed. In conclusion, ABPM is a reliable modality for the identification of masked HTN and white coat HTN. Masked HTN is correlated with increased risk of end organ damage and risk of death in potential kidney donors. Transplant physicians cannot rely solely on office BP monitoring in the assessment of potential living kidney donors. ABPM should be integral part of routine assessment of potential living kidney donors.

Impact of Donor Age on the Outcome of Living-donor Liver Transplantation: Special Consideration to the Feasibility of Using Elderly Donors

BACKGROUND

The use of elderly donors (≥60 y) in living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety of surgery for elderly donors and the impact of donor age on LDLT outcomes.

METHODS

We, retrospectively, reviewed 470 cases of LDLT at Kumamoto University Hospital from December 1998 to March 2017.

RESULTS

Donors were divided into 5 groups according to age: 20-29 (n = 109), 30-39 (n = 157), 40-49 (n = 87), 50-59 (n = 81), and ≥60 (n = 36). At our institution, elderly donor candidates required additional preoperative work-up. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications and duration of postoperative hospital stay among the 5 donor groups. Regardless of graft type, elderly donors were comparable to younger donor groups (<30 y) in postoperative recovery of liver function. Risk-adjusted overall survival rates of recipients among donor groups were not significantly different. Additionally, donor age was not significantly associated with 6-month graft survival of adult and pediatric recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly candidates ≥60 years of age can safely be selected as LDLT donors after meticulous preoperative work-up.

Elastography in the evaluation of liver allograft

Elastography is an established technique in the evaluation of chronic liver diseases. While there is a large clinical experience and data available regarding the performance of elastography in native liver, elastography experience with liver grafts is limited and still growing. Both ultrasound-based elastography techniques and MR Elastography (MRE) are useful in the assessment of liver fibrosis in liver transplants. Technical modifications for performing elastography will be required for optimum evaluation of the graft. In general, caution needs to be exercised regarding the use of elastography immediately following transplantation as post-operative changes, perioperative conditions/complications, inflammation, and rejection can cause increased stiffness in the graft. In the follow-up, detection of increased stiffness with elastography is useful for predicting development of fibrosis in the graft. Adjunctive MRI or ultrasound with Doppler also provides comprehensive evaluation of anatomy, vascular anastomosis and patency, biliary tree, and stiffness for fibrosis. In this review, we provide a brief overview of elastography techniques available followed by the literature review of elastography in the evaluation of grafts and illustration with clinical examples.

The utility of thrombophilia and hematologic screening in live liver donation

BACKGROUND

Most centers perform some degree of hematologic screening, including thrombophilia testing, on prospective live liver donors. The nature and extent of such screens are not standardized, and there is limited evidence regarding hematologic risk stratification.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We present an experience of hematologic screening among prospective liver donors. Five-hundred-eightyfour patients were screened for liver donation between 1/2013 and 1/2020, of whom 156 (27%) proceeded to donor hepatectomy. Thirty-three of 428 (8%) declined patients were excluded for hematologic indications. Hematologic indications were the 2nd most frequent medical indications for exclusion (trailing only hepatologic indications). The most common reason for hematologic exclusion was concern regarding thrombophilia. Nevertheless, 21 patients with evidence of possible thrombophilia proceeded to donor hepatectomy, and none incurred hematologic complications. Similarly, seven patients with screening findings concerning for increased bleeding risk (most often thrombocytopenia) underwent donor hepatectomy without hematologic complication. Three of 156 (2%) of patients who underwent donor hepatectomy incurred a hematologic complication (all thrombotic, none fatal). None of these patients had any evident hematologic risk factor on screening.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the difficulty of hematologic risk stratification among prospective living donors, however, suggests that some patients with relatively mild risk factors may be safe for donation.

Our Living Donor Protocol for Liver Transplant: A SingleCenter Experience

OBJECTIVES

The shortage of deceased donor organs is a limiting factor in transplant. The growing discrepancy between the wait list demand versus the supply of deceased donor organs has created an incentive for consideration of living donor liver transplant as an alternative. Here, we describe our evaluation process and donor complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 1988, we have performed 659 (449 living donor and 210 deceased donor) liver transplants. The most important evaluation criteria is the relationship between donor and recipient, and we require thatthe donor must be related to the recipient. The evaluation protocol has 5 stages. Donor complications were defined as simple, moderate, and severe.

RESULTS

We retrospectively investigated data for 1387 candidates, and 938 (67.7%) were rejected; subsequently, 449 living donor liver transplants were performed. There were no complications in 398 of the donors (88.7%). Total complication rate was 11.3%. Simple complications were seen in 31 patients (6.9%). Moderate complications were seen in 19 patients (4.2%). We had only 1 severe complication, ie, organ failure from unspecified liver necrosis, which resulted in death.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between donor and recipient and donor safety should be the primary focus for living donor liver transplant. Donor selection should be made carefully to minimize complications and provide adequately functional grafts.

Paediatric liver transplantation in Australia and New Zealand: 1985-2018

Liver transplantation has become the standard of care for children with end-stage liver disease. In Australia and New Zealand, there are four paediatric liver transplant units, in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Auckland. Over the past 30 years, there have been significant changes to indications for transplant, as well as medical and surgical advances. In this paper, using retrospective data from the Australia and New Zealand Liver Transplant Registry, we review 977 children (less than 16 years of age) who underwent liver transplant from 1985 to 2018. The most common indication was biliary atresia (54%), although there has been an increase in other indications, including inborn errors of metabolism, fulminant hepatic failure and malignant liver tumours. Over the past 3 decades, areas of change and innovation include: the use of 'split grafts' to enable an adult and a child to receive the same donor liver, live donation, improvements in immunosuppressive regimens and infectious prophylaxis protocols and innovative surgical techniques allowing transplantation in smaller infants. The outcomes for children who undergo liver transplant in ANZ are excellent, with current 10-year patient survival rates of 95%, comparable to other larger centres around the world.

Complications and outcomes of 890 living liver donor hepatectomies at a single center: risks of saving loved one's life

Objectives

Living liver donor surgery is a major surgical procedure applied to healthy people with mortality and morbidity risks and does not provide any direct therapeutic advantage to the donor. We retrospectively analyzed the postoperative complication of our living liver donors to figure out the risks of donation.

Material and Methods

Between November, 2006 and December, 2018, a total of 939 living liver donor hepatectomies were performed with no mortality to the living-related donors. Eight hundred and ninety donors with a minimum 1-year follow-up were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

Of the 890 donors, 519 (58.3%) were males and 371 (41.7%) were females. Mean age was 35 years (18-64) and mean body mass index was 25.7 kg/m² (17.7-40). Right donor hepatectomy was performed to 601 (67.5%), left donor hepatectomy to 28 (3.2%) and left lateral sector hepatectomy to 261 (29.3%) of the donors. Of the 890 donors, 174 (19.5%) donors experienced a total of 204 early and late complications including life- threatening and nearly life- threatening complications in 26 (2.9%) of them. Intraoperative complication occurred in 4 (0.5%) donors. Right donors hepatectomy complication rate (23.3%) was higher than left donor (14.3%) and left lateral sector donor hepatectomy (11.5%).

Conclusion

All donor candidates should be well-informed not only on the details of early and late complications of living liver donation, also possible outcomes of the recipient. In addition to detailed physical evaluation, preoperative psychosocial evaluation is also mandatory. Comprehensive donor evaluation, surgical experience, surgical technique, close postoperative follow-up and establishing a good dialog with the donor allows better outcomes.

Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplant: Hemodynamic Evaluation, Prognosis, and Recipient Selection

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplant (LDLT) is a well-established treatment for end-stage liver disease. A better recipient selection and hemodynamic evaluation may improve transplant outcomes. The aim of this study was to establish recipient parameters that could enhance the results of adult-to-adult LDLT.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of all adult-to-adult LDLTs from a single center between January 2006 and December 2018. Variables analyzed included demographic and clinical parameters, laboratory tests, performance of intraoperative temporary portocaval shunt (TPCS), graft weight/recipient weight ratio (GW/RW), preoperative portal vein thrombosis (PVT), previous major abdominal surgery, and patient survival. Patients were divided in 2 groups according to GW/RW (0.8% cutoff point).

RESULTS

A total of 92 adult-to-adult LDLTs were analyzed, encompassing 53 male patients (57.6%). Mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was 13.97 (SD, 4.74), and 57 patients (61.95%) had Child-Pugh-Turcotte score B. Mean GW/RW was 1.1% (SD, 0.37%). Group 1 with GW/RW > 0.8% (n = 74) and group 2 with it ≤ 0.8% (n = 13) presented mean GW/RW of 1.14% (SD, 0.24%) and 0.69% (SD, 0.09%) and P < .01, respectively. Eighteen patients (19.56%) presented PVT, with a worse survival than those without PVT (P = .006). Sixteen patients (17.39%) with previous major abdominal or biliary operations also presented higher mortality (P = .341). Forty-six (50%) intraoperative TPCSs were performed with a better 1- and 3-year patient survival. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed PVT area under the curve of 0.701 (95% CI, 0.526-0.876; P = .018), positive predictive value of 0.69, and negative predictive value of 0.62. Multivariate analysis showed important risk regarding PVT (odds ratio, 6.160; 95% CI, 1.566-24.223; P = .004) and retransplant (odds ratio, 4.452; 95% CI, 0.843-23.503; P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

Better recipient selection without PVT or previous major abdominal surgery, an adequate GW/RW, and intraoperative TPCS with hemodynamic modulation significantly improve outcomes of adult-to-adult LDLT.

Health-related quality of life, clinical outcomes, and subjective experiences of parent donors of pediatric liver transplant recipients

PURPOSE

The understanding of the HRQOL issues for parent donors of children who underwent LDLT is lacking. We evaluated the HRQOL of donor and non-donor parents, described their subjective experiences and identified factors associated with lower HRQOL post-donation.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study of parent donors whose children underwent LDLT, using SF-36v2 Health Survey to measure HRQOL, and a self-developed questionnaire to evaluate their subjective experiences.

RESULTS

Of 32 pairs of donor and non-donor parents, 27 donor and 19 non-donor parents responded. The data of respondents were analyzed. Both donor and non-donor parents' SF-36v2 norm-based scores were average or above average as compared to the Singapore population. Donors who made lifestyle changes post-donation (adopting a healthy balanced diet, regular physical activity, quitting smoking, and moderate alcohol intake) were associated with lower GH (P = 0.009) and PF (P = 0.002) scores. Donors who took more than 3 months for full recovery had lower RP (P = 0.022) and BP scores (P = 0.038). On multivariate analysis, recipient complication of Clavien grade 3 or 4 was associated with increased RP score by 8.71 points (95% CI: 1.74-15.68), after adjusting for time taken for full recovery. Majority (88.8%) had self-reported recovery time under 6 months and returned to work within 3 months (74.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Donors with factors potentially associated with lower HRQOL may need more support to ensure better HRQOL outcomes post-donation.

Pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy of living donor is feasible and safe: a preliminary comparative study in China

BACKGROUND

The adoption of laparoscopic techniques for living donor major hepatectomy has been controversial issue. The aim of this study is to present the preliminary experience of laparoscopic right hepatectomy in China.

METHODS

All the donors receiving right hepatectomy for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were divided into three groups: pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy (PLRH) group, hand-assisted right hepatectomy (HARH) group and open right hepatectomy (ORH) group. We compared the perioperative data and surgical outcomes of donors and recipients among three groups.

RESULTS

From November 2001 to May 2017, 295 donors have received right hepatectomy for LDLT in our center. Among them, 7 donors received PLRH, 26 donors received HARH and 262 donors received ORH. The operation time of PLRH group (509.3 ± 98.9 min) was longer than that of the HARH group (451.6 ± 89.7 min) and the ORH group (418.4 ± 81.1 min, p = 0.003). The blood loss was the least in the PLRH group (378.6 ± 177.1 mL), compared with that in the HARH group (617.3 ± 240.4 mL) and that in the ORH group (798.6 ± 483.7 mL, p = 0.0013). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the PLRH group (7, 7-10 days) than that in the HATH group (8.5, 7.5-12 days) and ORH group (11, 9-14 days; p = 0.001). Only one donor had pleural effusion (Grade I) and another one experienced pulmonary infection (Grade II). One recipient (14.3%) in the PLRH group occurred hepatic venous stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approaches for right hepatectomy contribute to less blood loss, better cosmetic satisfaction, less severe complications, and faster rehabilitation. PLRH is a safe and feasible procedure, which must be performed in highly specialized centers with expertise of both LDLT and laparoscopic hepatectomy, and requires a hybrid-to-pure stepwise development.

Predictive Factors of Liver Dysfunction After Right Hemihepatectomy for Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living liver donors represent a special group of patients. They are healthy individuals who are exposed to a major surgery, in which the dominant liver proportion is extracted as a graft. Of all potential donor-related morbidities, posthepatectomy liver dysfunction (PHLD) is the most significant as it may be directly related to donor mortality. We aimed to review our data of adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) utilizing the right hemiliver grafts to determine the incidence and potential predictors for the development of PHLD, defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery.

METHODS

We reviewed the data of all adult living donors who underwent right hemihepatectomy during the period between May 2004 and 2016.

RESULTS

During the study period, 434 cases underwent right hemihepatectomy for adult LDLT. We divided our cases into 2 groups according to the occurrence of PHLD. A significant lower residual liver volume and percentage were noted in PHLD group. Longer intensive care unit stay and hospital stay, and more postoperative morbidities, were observed in PHLD group. PHLD occurred in 50 cases (11.5%), and most of them were grade A (47 cases [10.8%]). Two cases (0.5%) had grade B requiring diuretic therapy, and 1 case (0.2%) had grade C requiring ultrasound guided tube drainage and surgical exploration finally.

CONCLUSIONS

We should not underestimate the risks of liver donation surgery, especially when utilizing the right hemiliver graft. Donor safety should be ensured by accurate preoperative volumetric assessment of the remnant liver and remnant liver volume limitations must be strictly followed.

Should living donor liver transplantation be an option when deceased donation is not?

When a liver transplantation candidate is declined for listing to receive a deceased organ, sometimes a loved one comes forward and offers to be a living donor. This raises the ethical question of whether a patient who is not eligible for deceased donor liver transplantation should be eligible for living donor liver transplantation. We compare living organ donation in kidney and liver transplantation and explore key ethical concepts of justice, fairness, and societal trust. Ultimately, because there is no alternative life-preserving therapy in end-stage liver disease, and because transplantation with a living donor organ does not involve removing a resource from the common pool of transplant organs, we argue that a standard of "slightly less benefit" than that required for deceased transplantation should be used to determine the acceptability of living donor liver transplantation.

Assessment of relevant factors with respect to psychosocial properties in potential living donor candidates before liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been developed as one of gold standard treatments for end-stage liver disease. Mental health is a required selection criterion for adult living liver donors and may influence the quality of life after operation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1,210 potential living donor candidates for liver transplantation (LT) underwent psychosocial evaluation that included a semi-structured interview, multi-choice self-reported inventory (Beck Depression Inventory-2nd edition [BDI-II], Beck Anxiety Inventory [BAI]), and the family APGAR (Adaptability, Partnership, Growth, Affection, Resolve) index. The test results were compared by family relationships, and subgroups were classified based on the donation type: 1) parents to children, 2) grown children to parents, 3) siblings to siblings, 4) spouses to spouses, and 5) other relatives to other relatives.

RESULTS

The BDI-II (P < 0.001) and BAI differed considerably according to the donation type in potential donor candidates. Compared with other subgroups, parents donating to their children suffered the most severe psychological stress before LDLT and exhibited more depressive (P < 0.001) and anxiety symptoms. However, the stress associated with grown children donating to their parents, siblings, and spouses was not significantly higher than it was for other relatives. Furthermore, a significant negative correlation existed between family APGAR scores and the severity of depression and anxiety (P < 0.001) among potential donor candidates.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate the importance of understanding potential donor candidates' psychological characteristics before LT. Greater anxiety and depression may be exhibited by parent donors due to the distress from fears of death or illness of the recipients, or their guilty feeling for their child. Additionally, family dysfunction also revealed more depression and anxiety. Such donor candidates should be given more extensive pre-donation counseling for minimizing pre-LDLT psychological stress.