Donor safety in living donor liver donation: An Italian multicenter survey

Evaluation and Management of Living Donors in the Setting of Living Donor Liver Transplant Program in the Republic of Uzbekistan

In the Republic of Uzbekistan, the history of liver transplantation began in 2018, but this type of medical care was introduced regularly only in 2021. The selection, preparation, and perioperative management of living liver donors can be complicated and have importance in the type of responsible medical care, which requires maximum doctor involvement at all stages. This review has detailed the donor selection algorithm in the Republic of Uzbekistan, donor preparation for liver resection, and basic principles of liver resection surgery in living donors. Algorithms for postoperative donor management and rehabilitation have also been described in detail.

The long-term follow-up of the living liver donors

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been proposed in many countries to reduce organ shortage. While the early postoperative outcomes have been well investigated, little is known about the long-term follow-up of the living donors. We, therefore, designed a systematic review of the literature to explore long-term complications and quality of life among living donors. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE registries for studies published since 2013 that specifically addressed long-term follow-up following living-donor liver donation, concerning both physical and psychological aspects. Publications with a follow-up shorter than 1 year or that did not clearly state the timing of outcomes were excluded. A total of 2505 papers were initially identified. After a thorough selection, 17 articles were identified as meeting the eligibility criteria. The selected articles were mostly from North America and Eastern countries. Follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 11.5 years. The most common complications were incision site discomfort (13.2-38.8%) and psychiatric disorders (1-22%). Biliary strictures occurred in 1-14% of cases. Minimally invasive donor hepatectomy could improve quality of life, but long-term data are limited. About 30 years after the first reported LDLT, little has been published about the long-term follow-up of the living donors. Different factors may contribute to this gap, including the fact that, as healthy individuals, living donors are frequently lost during mid-term follow-up. Although the reported studies seem to confirm long-term donor safety, further research is needed to address the real-life long-term impact of this procedure.

The aim of donor safety: surgical approaches and current results

Living liver donation (LLD) has been suggested as a potential solution to reduce the waitlist mortality for liver transplantation (LT) recipients by facilitating living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Ensuring both donor and recipient safety is a critical aspect of LDLT. An accurate understanding of the complexity and extend of safety outcomes of the donor is imperative to maintain the high-quality standard this medical program requires. This review seeks to outline safety outcome parameters of interest for donors. Early postoperative mortality is very low with no significant differences comparing left lobe to right lobe LLD. Complications most commonly are biliary (leakage or strictures), bleeding, respiratory or pulmonary, gastrointestinal or infectious. Return to full-time work and quality of life are essential parameters in the mid and long term. As evidence continues to accumulate, outcomes may evolve with the expansion of minimal invasive surgery practice and currently laparoscopic approach is recommended in large experienced centers. By offering safer operations that require fewer incisions or liver resections, living liver donations can be further encouraged, and the perception of the procedure can be improved. Rational consideration of the safety of the donor and in-depth discussion and evaluation with the patient is of utmost importance.

Impact of thoracic shape on the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted living donor hepatectomy

Background

Although laparoscopic-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) has become the definitive procedure for harvesting living donor livers, its surgical outcomes in association with donor body shape have not been elucidated.

Methods

The impact of donor factors, including thoracic shape, on LADH outcomes was retrospectively investigated. Thoracic anthropometric data were examined in all LADHs with a left/right graft between 2013 and 2022.

Results

The study included 210 LADHs, consisting of 106 left- and 104 right-lobe donors with similar blood loss and similar operation time. Males have greater thoracic depth and greater thoracic width compared with females, respectively. Thoracic depth was associated with graft weight (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), and operation time (p < 0.001). On multivariate analyses, blood loss >500 mL and operation time >8 h were associated with graft weight in the left-lobe donors, and blood loss >500 mL was associated with thoracic depth in the right-lobe donors.

Conclusion

The greater thoracic depth is associated with massive blood loss in right-lobe donors. Anthropometric parameters might be helpful for estimating LADH outcomes.

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.

Transplant oncology - Current indications and strategies to advance the field

Liver transplantation (LT) was originally described by Starzl as a promising strategy to treat primary malignancies of the liver. Confronted with high recurrence rates, indications drifted towards non-oncologic liver diseases with LT finally evolving from a high-risk surgery to an almost routine surgical procedure. Continuously improving outcomes following LT and evolving oncological treatment strategies have driven renewed interest in transplant oncology. This is not only reflected by constant refinements to the criteria for LT in patients with HCC, but especially by efforts to expand indications to other primary and secondary liver malignancies. With new patient-centred oncological treatments on the rise and new technologies to expand the donor pool, the field has the chance to come full circle. In this review, we focus on the concept of transplant oncology, current indications, as well as technical and ethical aspects in the context of donor organs as precious resources.

An international survey of venous thromboembolic events and current practices of peri-operative VTE prophylaxis after living donor hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolic complications are an uncommon but significant cause of morbidity & mortality after live donor hepatectomy . The precise incidence of these events and the current practices of centers performing living donor liver transplantation worldwide are unknown.

METHODS

An online survey was shared amongst living donor liver transplantation centers containing questions regarding center activity, center protocols for donor screening, peri-operative thromboembolic prophylaxis and an audit of -perioperative venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy in the previous five years (2016-2020).

RESULTS

Fifty-one centers from twenty countries completed the survey. These centers had cumulatively performed 11500 living donor liver transplants between 2016-2020. All centers included pre-operative l assessment for thromboembolic risk amongst potential liver donors in their protocols. Testing for inherited prothrombotic conditions was performed by 58% of centers. Dual-mode prophylaxis was the most common practice (65%), while eight and four centers used single mode or no routine prophylaxis respectively. Twenty (39%) and 15 (29%) centers reported atleast one perioperative deep venous thrmobosis or pulmonary embolism event respectively. There was one donor mortality directly related to post-operative pulmonary embolism. Overall incidence of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism events was 3.65 and 1.74 per 1000 live donor hepatectomies respectively. Significant variations in center practices and incidence of thromboembolic events was identified in the survey primarily divided along world regions. 75% of participating centers agreed on the need for clear international guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy are an uncommon but important cause of donor morbidity. There is significant variation in practice among centers. Evidence-based guidelines regarding risk assessment, and peri-operative prophylaxis are needed.

Donor Safety and Risk Factors of Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Korean Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify safety and risk factors of living donor after pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy in a Korean multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND

Pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy is not yet a standardized surgical procedure due to lack of data.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 543 patients undergoing PLRDH between 2010 and 2018 in 5 Korean transplantation centers. Complication rates were assessed and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors of open conversion, overall complications, major complications, and biliary complications.

RESULTS

Regarding open conversion, the incidence was 1.7% and the risk factor was body mass index >30 kg/m 2 [ P =0.001, odds ratio (OR)=22.72, 95% CI=3.56-146.39]. Rates of overall, major (Clavien-Dindo classification III-IV), and biliary complications were 9.2%, 4.4%, and 3.5%, respectively. For overall complications, risk factors were graft weight >700 g ( P =0.007, OR=2.66, 95% CI=1.31-5.41), estimated blood loss ( P <0.001, OR=4.84, 95% CI=2.50-9.38), and operation time >400 minutes ( P =0.01, OR=2.46, 95% CI=1.25-4.88). For major complications, risk factors were graft weight >700 g ( P =0.002, OR=4.01, 95% CI=1.67-9.62) and operation time >400 minutes ( P =0.003, OR=3.84, 95% CI=1.60-9.21). For biliary complications, risk factors were graft weight >700 g ( P =0.01, OR=4.34, 95% CI=1.40-13.45) and operation time >400 minutes ( P =0.01, OR=4.16, 95% CI=1.34-12.88).

CONCLUSION

Careful donor selection for PLRDH considering body mass index, graft weight, estimated blood loss, and operation time combined with skilled procedure can improve donor safety.

Successful living donor liver transplantation from an HIV and HCV positive donor: report from the first case in the world

HIV (human-immunodeficiency-virus) and HCV (hepatitis-C-virus) infections cause millions of deaths across the world every year. Since the introduction of effective therapies for HIV, in the middle of 1990s, and HCV, after 2013, those two untreatable infections became completely controlled. Donor safety is the main goal in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). An accurate predonation screening is mandatory for excluding risk factors related with any increase of donors' short-term and long-term morbidity. We present the first LDLT from a donor with both HIV and HCV previous infections. Donor and recipient did not experience any complication. Individuals with well controlled HIV/HCV infections and without any risk factors may be suitable for donation of a part of their healthy liver. Abstract video, http://links.lww.com/QAD/C833.

Прижизненное донорство фрагментов печени. Тактика ведения родственных доноров фрагмента печени в условиях стационара, а также амбулаторно после резекции печени. 2023. [DOI: 10.61726/7507.2024.31.90.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Учебно-методическое пособие для практикующих врачей, клинических ординаторов, магистров и студентов 5-6 курсов высших медицинских учебных заведений "Прижизненное донорство фрагментов печени. Тактика ведения родственных доноров фрагмента печени в условиях стационара, а также амбулаторно после резекции печени"

Enhanced recovery for liver transplantation: recommendations from the 2022 International Liver Transplantation Society consensus conference

There is much controversy regarding enhanced recovery for recipients of liver transplants from deceased and living donors. The objectives of this Review were to summarise current knowledge on individual enhanced recovery elements on short-term outcomes, identify key components for comprehensive pathways, and create internationally accepted guidelines on enhanced recovery for liver-transplant recipients. The ERAS4OLT.org collaborative partnered by the International Liver Transplantation Society performed systematic literature reviews on the effect of 32 relevant enhanced perioperative recovery elements on short-term outcomes, and global specialists prepared expert statements on deceased and living donor liver transplantation. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used for rating of quality of evidence and grading of recommendations. A virtual international consensus conference was held in January, 2022, in which results were presented, voted on by the audience, and discussed by an independent international jury of eight members, applying the Danish model of consensus. 273 liver transplantation specialists from 30 countries prepared expert statements on elements of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation based on the systematic literature reviews. The consensus conference yielded 80 final recommendations, covering aspects of enhanced recovery for preoperative assessment and optimisation, intraoperative surgical and anaesthetic conduct, and postoperative management for the recipients of liver transplants from both deceased and living donors, and for the living donor. The recommendations represent a comprehensive overview of the relevant elements and areas of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation. These internationally established guidelines could direct the development of enhanced recovery programmes worldwide, allowing adjustments according to local resources and practices.

Right Lobe Versus Left Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Donor and Recipient Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an established treatment for advanced liver disease. Whether right lobe (RL) or left lobe (LL) LDLT provides the best outcomes for donors and recipients remains contentious.

METHODS

MedLine, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central were searched to identify studies comparing RL- and LL-LDLT and reporting donor and/or recipient outcomes. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were used to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies were included. RL donors were more likely to experience major complications (relative risk [RR] = 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30-2.05; I2 = 19%) than LL donors; however, no difference was observed in the risk of any biliary complication (RR = 1.41; 95% CI = 0.91-2.20; I2 = 59%), bile leaks (RR = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.97-2.51; I2 = 52%), biliary strictures (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.43-1.88; I2 = 27%), or postoperative death (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.25-1.05; I2 = 0%). Among recipients, the incidence of major complications (RR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.68-1.06; I2 = 21%), biliary complications (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.91-1.33; I2 = 8%), and vascular complications (RR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.44-1.43; I2 = 0%) was similar. Although the rate of small for size syndrome (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.30-0.74; I2 = 0%) and postoperative deaths (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.44-0.87; I2 = 0%) was lower among RL-LDLT recipients, no differences were observed in long-term graft (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.55-1.38; I2 = 74%) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.60-1.22; I2 = 44%).

CONCLUSIONS

LL donors experience fewer complications than RL donors, and LL-LDLT recipients had similar outcomes to RL-LDLT recipients. These findings suggest that LL-LDLT offers the best outcomes for living donors and similar outcomes for recipients when measures are taken to prevent small for size syndrome.

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.

When is it safe for the liver donor to be discharged home and prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations? - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on discharge criteria after living liver donation (LLD).

OBJECTIVES

To identify the features for fit for discharge checklist after LLD to prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations and to provide international expert recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The critical outcomes included were complications rates and liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR) (CRD42021260725).

RESULTS

Total 57/1710 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 28/57 on the final analysis. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The complications rate was reported in 20/28 studies and ranged from 7.8% to 71.2%. Post hepatectomy liver function was reported in 13 studies. The Quality of Evidence (QoE) was Low and Very-Low for complications rate and liver function test, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Monitoring and prevention of donor complications should be crucial in decision making of discharge. Pain and diet control, removal of all drains and catheters, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, and use routine imaging (CT scan or liver ultrasound) before discharge should be included as fit for discharge checklist (QoE; Low | GRADE of recommendation; Strong). Transient Impaired liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR), a prognostic marker of outcome after liver resection, usually occurs after donor right hepatectomy and should be monitored. Improving trends for bilirubin and INR value should be observed by day 5 post hepatectomy and be included in the fit for discharge checklist. (QoE; Very-Low | GRADE; Strong).

Optimizing pre-donation physiologic evaluation for enhanced recovery after living liver donation - Systematic review and multidisciplinary expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

While preoperative physiologic evaluation of live liver donors is routinely performed to ensure donor safety and minimize complications, the optimal approach to this evaluation is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to identify predonation physiologic evaluation strategies to improve postoperative short-term outcomes, enhance donor's recovery, and reduce length of stay. We also aim to provide multidisciplinary expert panel recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

The systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, and the recommendations were formulated using GRADE approach and experts' opinion. The search included retrospective or prospective studies, describing outcomes of physiologic evaluation predonation. The outcomes of interest were length of stay, postoperative complications (POC), recovery after donation, and mortality. PROSERO protocol ID CRD42021260662.

RESULTS

Of 1386 articles screened, only three retrospective cohort studies met eligibility criteria. Two studies demonstrated no impact of age (< 70 years) on POC. Increased body mass index's (BMI) association with POC was present in one study (23.8 vs 21.7 kg/m2 , OR 1.67 (1.14-2.48), P = .01) and absent in another (< 30 vs 30-35 kg/m2 , P = .61). One study demonstrated decreased risk for postdonation subclinical hepatic dysfunction in donors with higher normal platelet count (PLT). None of the studies noted donor death. Given the scarce data on predonation physiologic testing, the expert panel recommended a battery of tests to guide clinical practice and future investigations.

CONCLUSION

Advancing age (60-69 years) is not a contraindication for liver donation. There is insufficient evidence for a specific predonation BMI cut-off. Abbreviated predonation physiologic testing is recommended in all candidates. Comprehensive testing is recommended in high-risk candidates while considering the pretest probability in various populations (Quality of evidence; Low to Very Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong).

The use of nondirected donor organs in living donor liver transplantation: Perspectives and guidance

Interest in anonymous nondirected living organ donation is increasing in the United States and a small number of transplantation centers are accumulating an experience regarding nondirected donation in living donor liver transplantation. Herein, we review current transplant policy, discuss emerging data, draw parallels from nondirected kidney donation, and examine relevant considerations in nondirected living liver donation. We aim to provide a consensus guidance to ensure safe evaluation and selection of nondirected living liver donors and a schema for just allocation of nondirected grafts.

Living Donor Liver Transplant Center Volume Influences Waiting List Survival Among Children Listed for Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Pediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains infrequently performed in the United States and localized to a few centers. This study aimed to compare pediatric waiting list and posttransplant outcomes by LDLT center volume.

METHODS

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database was retrospectively reviewed for all pediatric (age <18 y) liver transplant candidates listed between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019. The average annual number of LDLT, deceased donor partial liver transplant (DDPLT), and overall (ie, LDLT + DDPLT + whole liver transplants) pediatric liver transplants performed by each transplant center during the study period was calculated.

RESULTS

Of 88 transplant centers, only 44 (50%) performed at least 1 pediatric LDLT during the study period. LDLT, DDPLT, and overall transplant center volume were all positively correlated. LDLT center volume was protective against waiting list dropout after adjusting for confounding variables (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.97; P = 0.004), whereas DDPLT and overall center volume were not (P > 0.05); however, DDPLT center volume was significantly protective against both recipient death and graft loss, whereas overall volume was only protective against graft loss and LDLT volume was not protective for either.

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume pediatric LDLT center can improve waiting list survival, whereas DDPLT and overall volume are associated with posttransplant survival. Expertise in all types of pediatric liver transplant options is important to optimize outcomes.

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.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Predominantly Young Parental Living Liver Donors: A Cross-Sectional Study in China

Objective: The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of donors deserves attention and must be considered for a long time. Many of the published studies had small sample sizes, and research from mainland China, in particular, is scant. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the HRQoL of living liver donors and identify the influencing factors of the HRQoL in mainland China.

Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. The data were collected from the liver transplantation center, the Tianjin First Center Hospital, China. Living liver donors older than 18 years and at a minimum of 1-month, post-donation was included. The HRQoL was evaluated using the Medical Outcome Study Short form 36 (SF-36). Sociodemographic and clinical-related variables, HRQoL status, and its potential impact factors were analyzed.

Results: A total of 382 living liver donors completed the survey. The median number of months post-donation was 25, and parental donors (99.2%) were the most frequent relationship. The majority of the participants (372, 97.4%) donated their left lateral lobes. Thirty-two (8.4%) donors suffered complications, and of them, 7 suffered from biliary leakage (1.8%), which was the most common one in this study. The physical functioning (PF), role–physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), social functioning (SF), role–emotional (RE), and mental health (MH) scores among the living liver donors were significantly better than those of the Chinese norms. Short-time post-donation [odds ratio (OR): 0.008; p < 0.001] and male recipients (OR:0.195; p = 0.024) were associated with the likelihood of a poor physical related quality of life.

Conclusions: Despite, in general, good HRQoL outcomes, we also believed that liver donation has an obvious influence on the physical functions of liver donors. More attention and long-term follow-ups are necessary for donors at higher risk based on identified influencing factors and correlates.

Donor Morbidity Is Equivalent Between Right and Left Hepatectomy for Living Liver Donation: A Meta-Analysis

Maximizing liver graft volume benefits the living donor liver recipient. Whether maximizing graft volume negatively impacts living donor recovery and outcomes remains controversial. Patient randomization between right and left hepatectomy has not been possible due to anatomic constraints; however, a number of published, nonrandomized observational studies summarize donor outcomes between 2 anatomic living donor hepatectomies. This meta-analysis compares donor-specific outcomes after right versus left living donor hepatectomy. Systematic searches were performed via PubMed, Cochrane, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies between January 2005 and November 2019. The primary outcomes compared overall morbidity and incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo >III) between right and left hepatectomy in donors after liver donation. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to derive summary risk estimates of outcomes. A total of 33 studies (3 prospective and 30 retrospective cohort) were used to identify 7649 pooled patients (5993 right hepatectomy and 1027 left hepatectomy). Proportion of donors who developed postoperative complications did not significantly differ after right hepatectomy (0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.40) and left hepatectomy (0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.29; P = 0.19). The overall risk ratio (RR) did not differ between right and left hepatectomy (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.83-1.63; P = 0.36). The relative risk for a donor to develop severe complications showed no differences by hepatectomy side (Incidence rate ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.67-1.40; P = 0.86). There is no evidence that the overall morbidity differs between right and left lobe donors. Publication bias reflects institutional and surgeon variation. A prospective, standardized, multi-institutional study would help quantify the burden of donor complications after liver donation.

Advances in the surgical outcomes of 300 cases of pure laparoscopic living donor right hemihepatectomy divided into three periods of 100 cases: a single-centre case series

Background

Minimally invasive surgery has been widely used for hepatobiliary operations. This study aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of pure laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy.

Methods

From November 2015 to April 2019, 300 cases of adult pure laparoscopic living donor right hepatectomy performed at Seoul National University Hospital were divided into three subgroups of periods 1-3 of 100 cases each: 1-100, 101-200, and 201-300, respectively. We retrospectively reviewed and analysed the safety and feasibility outcomes.

Results

The operative time (period 1: 318.9±62.2 min, period 2: 256.7±71.4 min, period 3: 227.7±57.4 min) and blood loss (period 1: 419.7±196.5 mL, period 2: 198.9±197.2 mL, period 3: 166.0±130.0 mL) gradually decreased (P<0.01). Similarly, the length of hospital stay decreased (period 1: 8.1±2.0 days, period 2: 7.3±3.1 days, period 3: 6.9±2.4 days, P<0.01). There was no requirement for intraoperative transfusions or care in the intensive care unit. The overall complication rate was 20/300 (6.7%), of which 8/300 (2.7%) were Clavien-Dindo grade III and above. Complications were not different among the three periods. In terms of anatomical variations, the incidences of multiple portal veins, multiple hepatic arteries, and multiple bile ducts were 32/300 (10.7%), 11/300 (3.7%), and 161/300 (53.7%), respectively. No differences were found among the three periods.

Conclusions

Owing to the technical improvements over time, pure laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy is currently feasible and safe even for donors with anatomical variations.

Association of intraoperative hypotension with postoperative morbidity and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Intraoperative hypotension, with varying definitions in literature, may be associated with postoperative complications. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the association of intraoperative hypotension with postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for studies published between January 1990 and August 2018. The primary endpoints were postoperative overall morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints were postoperative cardiac outcomes, acute kidney injury, stroke, delirium, surgical outcomes and combined outcomes. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses and a meta-regression were performed to test the robustness of the results and to explore heterogeneity.

Results

The search identified 2931 studies, of which 29 were included in the meta-analysis, consisting of 130 862 patients. Intraoperative hypotension was associated with an increased risk of morbidity (odds ratio (OR) 2.08, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.56 to 2.77) and mortality (OR 1.94, 1.32 to 2.84). In the secondary analyses, intraoperative hypotension was associated with cardiac complications (OR 2.44, 1.52 to 3.93) and acute kidney injury (OR 2.69, 1.31 to 5.55). Overall heterogeneity was high, with an I² value of 88 per cent. When hypotension severity, outcome severity and study population variables were added to the meta-regression, heterogeneity was reduced to 50 per cent.

Conclusion

Intraoperative hypotension during non-cardiac surgery is associated with postoperative cardiac and renal morbidity, and mortality. A universally accepted standard definition of hypotension would facilitate further research into this topic.

Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Recipients with Low MELD: A Strategy Intended to Overcome Donor Shortage

Recent series have demonstrated advantages of living donor over deceased donor liver transplantation, with particular benefit for those with low model for end-stage liver disease score. The logic underlying the transplantation of patients before they become too sick is intuitive. It reduces mortality and drop outs from the waiting list and makes transplant surgery less demanding. Those principles have to be balanced with donor safety and transplant benefit for the recipient avoiding early, futile transplantation. The authors report a case of adult to adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation performed for a recipient affected by primary biliary cirrhosis with MELD score of 15, in a transplant center located in an area of Europe characterized by chronic organ shortage.

Endoscopic treatment of biliary complications in donors after living donor liver transplantation in a high volume transplant center

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been accepted as a primary treatment for adults with end-stage liver disease, concerns about donor health have been emerged. As LDLT is technically complex, it creates perioperative morbidity and mortality risk in donors. Biliary complications such as stricture and leakage are seen most frequently in donors after liver transplantation. While some of these complications get treated with conservative approach, endoscopic, surgical, and percutaneous interventions may be required in some others. We aimed to present endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) results in donors who developed biliary complications after LDLT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between June 2010 and January 2018, a total of 1521 donors (1291 right lobe grafts, 230 left lobe grafts) of patients who underwent LDLT, were retrospectively reviewed. 63 donors who underwent ERC due to biliary complication, were included in the study.

RESULTS

Biliary stricture was found in 1.6% (25/1521), biliary leakage in 2.1% (33/1521), and stricture and leakage together in 0.3% (5/1521) donors. Our endoscopic success rates in patients with biliary leakage, biliary stricture, and stricture and leakage were 85% (28/33), 92% (23/25), and 80% (4/5), respectively. Surgical treatment was performed on 12.6% (8/63) donors who failed ERC.

CONCLUSION

We found that ERC is a successful treatment for post-LDLT donors who have biliary complications.

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.

Respiratory Complications Among Living Liver Donors: A Single-Center Retrospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

The safety of living liver donors is considered a high priority. In this study, we aimed to highlight the incidence and risk factors of respiratory complications among living liver transplant donors at our institute.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated data of 178 related living liver donors who were seen from January 2014 to December 2018. We recorded significant respiratory complications, such as pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pneumonia, acute lung injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and transfusion-related acute lung injury. Complications were noted as clinically evident and/or needing intervention. We also recorded the frequency of nonrespiratory complications and duration of intensive care unit and hospital stays.

RESULTS

Ten donors (5.6%) developed significant respiratory complications: 2 (1.1%) had pulmonary embolisms, 3 (1.7%) developed symptomatic pleural effusion that required thoracentesis, and 4 (2.25%) had chest infections. The remaining donor (0.6%) had unexplained respiratory insufficiency. Logistic regression analyses identified age ≥ 35 years and previous surgery as the main risk factors of significant respiratory complications. There were no recorded cases of pneumothorax, acute lung injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and transfusion-related acute lung injury. Raw surface collection (14.6%) and biliary leakage (7.9%) were the most frequent nonrespiratory complications. There was no significant difference between patients with and without significant respiratory complications with regard to intensive care unit and hospital stays.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the low incidence of significant respiratory complications among our living liver donor cohort, close monitoring and early management are essential to achieve better prognosis, especially in donors older than 35 years or those with previous surgery.

Minimally Invasive Donor Hepatectomy for Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation: An International, Multi-Institutional Evaluation of Safety, Efficacy and Early Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Evaluating the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive (MIV) donor hepatectomy for adult live donor liver transplants in a large multi-institutional series from both Eastern and Western centers.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection has become standard practice for minor resections in selected patients in whom it provides reduced postoperative morbidity and faster rehabilitation. Laparoscopic approaches in living donor hepatectomy for transplantation, however, remain controversial because of safety concerns. Following the recommendation of the Jury of the Morioka consensus conference to address this, a retrospective study was designed to assess the early postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic donor hepatectomy. The collective experience of 10 mature transplant teams from Eastern and Western countries was reviewed.

METHODS

All centers provided data from prospectively maintained databases. Only left and right hepatectomies performed using a MIV technique were included in this study. Primary outcome was the occurrence of complications using the Clavien-Dindo graded classification and the Comprehensive Complication Index during the first 3 months. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

In all, 412 MIV donor hepatectomies were recorded including 164 left and 248 right hepatectomies. Surgical technique was either pure laparoscopy in 175 cases or hybrid approach in 237. Conversion into standard laparotomy was necessary in 17 donors (4.1%). None of the donors died. Also, 108 experienced 121 complications including 9.4% of severe (Clavien-Dindo 3-4) complications. Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 5.2.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows favorable early postoperative outcomes in more than 400 MIV donor hepatectomy from 10 experienced centers. These results are comparable to those of benchmarking series of open standard donor hepatectomy.

Should living donor liver transplant selection be subject to the same restrictions as deceased donor transplant?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the United States, most of the liver allografts come from deceased donors, and our current liver recipient selection process is heavily centered on the ethical principle of utility to maximize the net benefit to the liver recipient community as a group rather than individuals due to the organ scarcity. Although living donor liver transplantation contributes less than 5% of total liver transplant in the United States, these living donor recipients are being subjected to the same selection process designed to benefit the group as a whole rather than the individuals. We would like to examine if these recipients who have living donors should be subjected to the same selection process.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are several disease processes where liver transplantation is the only curative option, and recent studies have shown clear survival benefits with liver transplantation.

SUMMARY

For those who have living donors, different selection criteria based on their specific disease, not based on the principle of utilization should be used to evaluate their candidacy.

Pulmonary Embolism in a Donor of Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a rare but potentially fatal complication that may develop in a living liver donor. Here, we report a case of non-massive PE diagnosed by elevated serum D-dimer levels and successfully treated using anticoagulant therapy. A 57-year-old man underwent extended left hepatectomy as a living liver donor. His past medical history included hypertension and dyslipidemia which required medication and a history of smoking. Mechanical prophylactic measures for venous thromboembolism, including intermittent pneumatic compression and elastic stocking, were used; however, no pharmacological prophylaxis was used. Although the patient ambulated on postoperative day (POD) 1, he developed hypoxia. Serum D-dimer level was elevated to 29.3 ng/mL on POD 2. Enhanced computed tomography revealed small peripheral PEs in the branches of the right upper, right middle, and left lower lobes without deep vein thrombosis. Intravenous heparin was initiated followed by warfarin. The thrombi resolved completely by POD 13, following which warfarin was continued for 3 months. As of 25 months after donation, the patient remains well without recurrence of PE. Early diagnosis and treatment of postoperative PE are critical for preventing mortality of liver donors.

Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy for Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Recipients

Even after 2 decades of experience in laparoscopic hepatectomy, data on purely laparoscopic approach for donor hepatectomy in adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are limited. We report our initial experience of a purely laparoscopic approach for donor hepatectomy for adult recipients to explore its potential application in the management of donors. We did a retrospective data analysis of 54 consecutive patients operated on between May 2013 and February 2015. There were 41 right, 10 extended right, and 3 left hepatectomies. The median operative time was 436 minutes (range 294-684 minutes), and warm ischemia time was 6 minutes (2-12 minutes). Estimated blood loss was 300 mL (10-850 mL), and none of the patients required intraoperative transfusion. Four cases were converted to open laparotomy. The major complication rate was 16.7%, and biliary complication was the most frequent cause. Patients with normal anatomy had a major complication rate of 9.3% as compared with 45.5% in patients with anatomic variations. All patients recovered, and there was no mortality. In conclusion, a purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy for adult LDLT recipients seems to be a feasible option; with careful patient selection and when performed by experienced surgeons, it may afford results comparable to the open method.

Outcome of donor biliary complications following living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Biliary complications are the most common donor complication following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The aim of this study is to investigate the long-term outcomes of biliary complications in right lobe adult-to-adult LDLT donors, and to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic treatment of these donors.

METHODS

The medical charts of right lobe donors who developed biliary complications between June 2000 and January 2008 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 337 right lobe donors, 49 developed biliary complications, including 36 diagnosed with biliary leakage and 13 with biliary stricture. Multivariate analysis showed that biliary leakage was associated with the number of right lobe bile duct orifices. Sixteen donors, five with leakage and 11 with strictures, underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). ERC was clinically successful in treating eight of the 11 strictures, one by balloon dilatation and seven by endobiliary stenting. Of the remained three, two were treated by rescue percutaneous biliary drainage and one by conservative care. Of the five patients with leakage, four were successfully treated using endobiliary stents and one with conservative care. In overall, total 35 improved with conservative treatment. All inserted stents were successfully retrieved after a median 264 days (range, 142 to 502) and there were no recurrences of stricture or leakages during a median follow-up of 10.6 years (range, 8 to 15.2).

CONCLUSIONS

All donors with biliary complications were successfully treated non-surgically, with most improving after endoscopic placement of endobiliary stents and none showing recurrence on long term follow-up.

Revisiting donor risk over two decades of single-center experience: More attention on the impact of overweight

OBJECTIVE

Morbidity rates after living donor hepatectomy vary greatly among centers. Donor morbidity in a tertiary center over the past two decades was revisited.

METHODS

Clinical data and grading of complications were reviewed by a nontransplant surgeon based on Clavien 5 tier grading. Risk factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 473 consecutive living liver donors from 1997 to 2016 were included for analysis; 305 were right liver donors and 168 left liver donors, and the corresponding morbidity rates were 27.2% and 9.5%. The majority (81/99, 81.2%) of complications were grade I and II. Donors with morbidity compared with those without were significantly younger, nonoverweight body figure (BMI < 25), more as the right liver donors, and longer length of hospital stay. Right liver donation had significantly higher morbidity rates than did left liver donation in earlier periods (before 2011), but not thereafter. Multivariate modeling revealed that right lobe donation and overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m²) were significant factors associated with donor morbidity, with adjusted hazard ratios HR (95% confidence interval) of 3.401 (1.909-6.060) and 0.550 (0.304-0.996), respectively. Further, overweight was a paradoxical risk factor in right donor hepatectomy with HR 0.422 (0.209-0.851), but the effect was nonsignificant in left liver donors. Most complications in overweight donors were grade I and not specific to liver surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall complication rate was 20.9%. Overweight might be protective against morbidity in right hepatectomy and warrants further deliberation.

Extreme hepatic resections for the treatment of advanced hepatoblastoma: Are planned close margins an acceptable approach?

BACKGROUND

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is considered the standard for children with hepatoblastoma (HB) in whom complete surgical resection is not possible. However, OLT is not always available or feasible.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the outcome of children with HB who were initially deemed unresectable and underwent complex hepatectomy with planned close margins, and ultimately avoided OLT.

METHODS

Demographic data, surgical and pathologic details, and survival information were collected from children treated for HB between January 2010 to December 2015.

RESULTS

Among six children (median age 12 months (3-41 months)), PRETEXT classification was III (n = 2), III/IV (n = 1), and IV (n = 3). Patients received a median of six cycles (range 4-7) of platinum-based induction chemotherapy; five received doxorubicin. Experienced pediatric surgeons performed extended right and left hepatectomy in five and one patients, respectively, with assistance of an experienced liver transplant surgeon (n = 4). Microscopic margins were positive (n = 2) and negative but close (n = 4; 2-5 mm). Two patients required vascular reconstruction of the vena cava. At median follow-up of 3.3 years (1.7-4.6 years), there was no evidence of local recurrence. One patient had recurrence of pulmonary disease 3 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced HB treated with complex surgical resections with positive or close negative margins had good outcomes without OLT. We suggest that planned positive or close microscopic margins in highly selected HB patients may spare the morbidity of OLT and offer an alternative for those ineligible for OLT. Our experience illustrates the importance of a multidisciplinary team specialized in the management of liver tumors.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Over the last several years, liver transplantation has evolved to become a widely used treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The criteria used were developed in order to have acceptable outcomes for transplant with survival similar to other indications for transplant. These criteria are discussed in detail along with alternate options, including surgical resection and downstaging of HCC in cirrhotics. Technical considerations of liver transplantation must be considered, and living donor liver transplant is a possibility for treatment.

Biliary reconstructive techniques and associated anatomic variants in adult living donor liver transplantations: The adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study experience

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a technically demanding endeavor, requiring command of the complex anatomy of partial liver grafts. We examined the influence of anatomic variation and reconstruction techniques on surgical outcomes and graft survival in the 9-center Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). Data from 272 adult LDLT recipients (2011-2015) included details on anatomic characteristics and types of intraoperative biliary reconstruction. Associations were tested between reconstruction technique and complications, which included first biliary complication (BC; leak, stricture, or biloma) and first vascular complication (VC; hepatic artery thrombosis [HAT] or portal vein thrombosis [PVT]). Time to patient death, graft failure, and complications were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves and tested with log-rank tests. Median posttransplant follow-up was 1.2 years. Associations were found between the type of biliary reconstruction and the incidence of VC (P = 0.03) and BC (P = 0.05). Recipients with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy had the highest probability of VC. Recipients with biliary reconstruction involving the use of high biliary radicals on the recipient duct had the highest likelihood of developing BC (56% by 1 year) compared with duct-to-duct (42% by 1 year). In conclusion, the varied surgical approaches in the A2ALL centers offer a novel opportunity to compare disparate LDLT approaches. The choice to use higher biliary radicals on the recipient duct for reconstruction was associated with more BC, possibly secondary to devascularization and ischemia. The use of Roux-en-Y biliary reconstruction was associated with VCs (HAT and PVT). These results can be used to guide biliary reconstruction decisions in the setting of anatomic variants and inform further improvements in LDLT reconstructions. Ultimately, this information may contribute to a lower incidence of technical complications after LDLT. Liver Transplantation 23 1519-1530 2017 AASLD.

The First Comparative Study of the Perioperative Outcomes Between Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy and Laparoscopy-Assisted Donor Hepatectomy in a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

In a statement from the second International Consensus Conference for Laparoscopic Liver Resection, adult-to-adult laparoscopic donor surgery was the earliest phase of development. It was recommended that the procedure be performed under institutional ethical approval and a reporting registry.

METHOD

At our institute, we started laparoscopy-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) in 2007 and changed to pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) in 2012. This study included 40 living donors who underwent LADH and 14 live donors who underwent PLDH. We describe the technical aspects and outcomes of our donor hepatectomy from assist to pure and examine the liver allograft outcomes of the recipients after LADH and PLDH.

RESULTS

There was significantly less blood loss in the PLDH group (81.07 ± 52.78 g) than that in the LADH group (238.50 ± 177.05 g), although the operative time was significantly longer in the PLDH group (454.93 ± 85.60 minutes) than in the LADH group (380.40 ± 44.08 minutes). And there were no significant differences in postoperative complication rate in the 2 groups. The liver allograft outcomes were acceptable and comparable with open living donor hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

By changing our routine approach from assist to pure, PLDH can be performed safely, with better exposure due to magnification, and with less blood loss under pneumoperitoneal pressure. PLDH, which has become our promising donor procedure, results in less blood loss, better cosmesis, and the donor's complete rehabilitation without deterioration in donor safety.

Donor safety in living donor liver transplantation: The Korean organ transplantation registry study

Major concerns about donor safety cause controversy and limit the use of living donor liver transplantation to overcome organ shortages. The Korean Organ Transplantation Registry established a nationwide organ transplantation registration system in 2014. We reviewed the prospectively collected data of all 832 living liver donors who underwent procedures between April 2014 and December 2015. We allocated the donors to a left lobe group (n = 59) and a right lobe group (n = 773) and analyzed the relations between graft types and remaining liver volumes and complications (graded using the Clavien 5-tier grading system). The median follow-up was 19 months (range, 10-31 months). During the study period, 553 men and 279 women donated livers, and there were no deaths after living liver donation. The overall, biliary, and major complication (grade ≥ III) rates were 9.3%, 1.7%, and 1.9%, respectively. The graft types and remaining liver volume were associated with significantly different overall, biliary, and major complication rates. Of the 16 patients with major complications, 9 (56.3%) involved biliary complications (2 biliary strictures [12.5%] and 7 bile leakages [43.8%]). Among the 832 donors, the mean aspartate transaminase, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin levels were 23.9 ± 8.1 IU/L, 20.9 ± 11.3 IU/L, and 0.8 ± 0.4 mg/dL, respectively, 6 months after liver donation. In conclusion, biliary complications were the most common types of major morbidity in living liver donors. Donor hepatectomy can be performed successfully with minimal and easily controlled complications. Our study shows that prospective, nationwide cohort data provide an important means of investigating the safety in living liver donation. Liver Transplantation 23 999-1006 2017 AASLD.