Applicability of living donor liver transplantation to high-urgency patients

Complications and Long-Term Outcomes in Adult Patients Undergoing Living Donor Liver Transplantation Because of Fulminant Hepatitis

BACKGROUND

The present study investigates the complications that may occur during long-term follow-up in patients aged 18 years and older undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in our clinic because of fulminant hepatitis.

METHODS

The study included patients aged 18 years and older with a minimum survival of 6 months who underwent an LDLT between June 2000 and June 2017. The demographic data of the patients were evaluated in terms of late-term complications.

RESULTS

Of the 240 patients who met the study criteria, 8 (3.3%) underwent LDLT for fulminant hepatitis. The indication for transplantation in patients with fulminant hepatitis was cryptogenic liver hepatitis in 4 patients, acute hepatitis B infection in 2 patients, hemochromatosis in 1 patient, and toxic hepatitis in 1 patient. Of the 240 patients, 65 (27%) undergoing LDLT underwent a liver biopsy for suspected rejection because of an elevation in liver function test results during follow-up. Histopathologic scoring was carried out according to the Banff scoring system. A diagnosis of late acute rejection was made in only 1 of the 8 patients (12.5%) who underwent LDLT for fulminant hepatitis.

CONCLUSION

Patients with fulminant hepatitis must be prepared for an LDLT, if available, while waiting for a cadaveric donor. The results of the present study suggest that LDLTs in patients with fulminant hepatitis are safe, and the outcomes are acceptable in terms of survival and complications.

Outcomes of living versus deceased donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure in the United States

Clinical outcomes for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for acute liver failure (ALF) in the United States remain to be determined. To address this gap in knowledge, we examined post-liver transplantation outcomes of adults with ALF undergoing LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in the United States. We analyzed Organ and Procurement and Transplantation Network data for adults with ALF who were listed for liver transplantation as status 1 or 1A and who underwent LDLT (N = 21) or DDLT (N = 2316) between October 1987 and April 2011. We found no strong evidence that the survival probabilities for adults with ALF who underwent LDLT were inferior to those who underwent DDLT (P = .764). In adults with ALF who underwent LDLT, 1- and 5-year survival probabilities were both 71%; for DDLT these probabilities were 79% and 71%, respectively. In adults with ALF, 1- and 5-year liver graft survival probabilities, respectively, were 62% and 57% for LDLT, and 74% and 66% for DDLT. In these series of adults with ALF who were listed as status 1 or 1A, patient and graft survival rates for LDLT were similar to those for DDLT. Our findings suggest that if deceased donor livers are unavailable, LDLT is an acceptable option in experienced centers for adults with ALF.

A complete treatment of adult living donor liver transplantation: a review of surgical technique and current challenges to expand indication of patients

The growing disparity between the number of liver transplant candidates and the supply of deceased donor organs has motivated the development of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Over the last two decades, the operation has been markedly improved by innovations rendering modern results comparable with those of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). However, there remains room for further innovation, particularly in adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT). Unlike whole-size DDLT and pediatric LDLT, size-mismatching between ALDLT graft and recipient body weight and changing dynamics of posttransplant allograft regeneration have remained major challenges. A better understanding of the complex surgical anatomy and physiologic differences of ALDLT helps avoid small-for-size graft syndrome, graft congestion from outflow obstruction and graft hypoperfusion from portal flow steal. ALDLT for high-urgency patients (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score >30) can achieve results comparable to DDLT in high volume centers. Size limitations of partial grafts and donor safety issues can be overcome with dual grafts and modified right-lobe grafts that preserve the donor's middle hepatic vein trunk. Extended application of LDLT for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma above Milan criteria is an optional strategy at the cost of slightly compromised survival. ABO-blood group incompatibility obstacles have been broken down by introducing a paired donor exchange program and refined peri-operative management of ABO-incompatible ALDLT. This review focuses on recent innovations of surgical techniques, safe donor selection, current strategies to expand ALDLT with broadened patient selection criteria and important aspects of teamwork required for success.

Outcomes after living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure in Japan: results of a nationwide survey

Nationwide surveys of acute liver failure (ALF) are conducted annually in Japan, and 20% of patients with ALF undergo liver transplantation (LT). We extracted data for 212 patients who underwent LT for ALF from the nationwide survey database of the Intractable Liver Diseases Study Group of Japan. After the exclusion of 3 patients who underwent deceased donor LT, 209 recipients of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were analyzed. ALF patients were placed into 3 subgroups according to the time from the onset of the disease to the occurrence of encephalopathy: patients who presented with encephalopathy within 10 days of the disease's onset were classified as having acute ALF, patients who presented within 11 to 56 days were classified as having subacute ALF, and patients who presented within 9 to 24 weeks were classified as having late-onset hepatic failure (LOHF). Long-term follow-up data were obtained from the registry of the Japanese Liver Transplantation Society. The 2 data sets were merged, and descriptive and survival data were analyzed. A Cox regression analysis was performed to define factors predicting overall mortality, short-term mortality (≤90 days after LT), and long-term mortality (>90 days after LT). One hundred ninety of the analyzed patients (91%) were adults (age ≥ 18 years); 70 patients (34%) were diagnosed with acute ALF, 124 (59%) were diagnosed with subacute ALF, and 15 (7%) were diagnosed with LOHF. Hepatitis B virus was the most common cause of acute ALF (61%), whereas autoimmune hepatitis (14%) and drug allergy-induced hepatitis (14%) were more frequent in patients with subacute ALF or LOHF. The cumulative patient survival rates 1, 5, and 10 years after LT were 79%, 74%, and 73%, respectively. Patient age was associated with short- and long-term mortality after LT, whereas ABO incompatibility affected short-term mortality, and donor age affected long-term mortality. In conclusion, the long-term outcomes of LDLT for ALF in this study were excellent, regardless of the etiology or classification. The majority of the donors were living donors. Increasing the deceased donor pool might be an urgent necessity.

Fulminant hepatic failure: when to transplant

Fulminant hepatic failure is a life-threatening condition that can lead to rapid deterioration and death if timely treatment is not instituted. Many patients recover with supportive care. Patients with deteriorating signs and laboratory parameters require prompt assessment and listing for liver transplantation. Outcome following transplantation is a function of severity of illness before transplantation, timeliness of liver transplantation and graft quality and function. With appropriate immunosuppression and close follow-up most patients can lead near normal lives following liver transplantation.

Alleviating the burden of small-for-size graft in right liver living donor liver transplantation through accumulation of experience

The issue of small-for-size graft (SFSG) containing the middle hepatic vein in right liver living donor liver transplantation from 1996 to 2008 (n = 320) was studied. Characteristics of donors, grafts and recipients were comparable between Era I (first 50 cases) and Era II (next 270 cases) except that the median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was higher in Era I (29 vs. 24; p = 0.024). The median graft to standard liver volume ratio (G/SLV) in Era I was 49.0% (range, 32.8-86.2%), versus 49.3% (range, 28.4-89.4%) in Era II (p = 0.498). Hospital mortality rate, the study endpoint, dropped from 16.0% (8/50) in Era I to 2.2% (6/270) in Era II (p = 0.000). Univariate analysis showed that MELD score (p = 0.002), pretransplant hepatorenal syndrome (p = 0.000) and Era I (p = 0.000) were significant in hospital mortality. Logistic regression analysis showed that only Era I (relative risk 9.758; 95% confidence interval, 2.885-33.002; p = 0.000) was significant. In Era I, G/SLV<40% had a relative risk of 7.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.225-49.677; p = 0.030). The hospital mortality rates for G/SLV<40% were 50% (3/6) and 1.9% (1/52) in Era I and II respectively. In conclusion, through accumulation of experience, SFSG became less important as a factor in hospital mortality.

Emergent right lobe adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation for high model for end-stage liver disease score severe hepatitis

The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of emergency right lobe adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score severe hepatitis. Consecutive 10 high MELD score severe hepatitis patients underwent emergency right lobe adult-to-adult LDLT in our hospital from April to December 2007. The MELD score was 34.50 +/- 2.088. The outcomes of these recipients were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, eight cases of ABO blood group were identical and two cases compatible, one case was Rh negative. Two recipients died and the rest of the recipients and all donors are safe; perioperative and 2-year survival rate was 80%. The mean graft-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 1.27% +/- 0.25%, and graft volume to recipient standard liver volume ratio (GV/ESLVR) was 56.7% +/- 6.75%. Of the 10 patients, three received right lobe grafts with middle hepatic vein (MHV), four without MHV, three without MHV but followed by V and VIII hepatic vein outflow reconstruction. An encouraging outcome was achieved in this group: elevated serum creatinine, serum endotoxin, decreased serum prothrombin activity, and Tbil returned to normal on postoperative days 3, 7, 14, and 28, respectively. One-year survival rate was 80%. Outcomes of emergency right lobe adult-to-adult LDLT for high MELD score severe hepatitis were fairly encouraging and acceptable. Emergency right lobe adult-to-adult LDLT is an effective and life-saving modality for high MELD score acute liver failure patients following severe hepatitis.

Living-donor liver transplantation in adults

INTRODUCTION

The technique of paediatric living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become standardized. In adults, however, there is scope for innovation. Unlike cadaveric whole-size liver transplantation and paediatric LDLT, size matching between the liver graft and the recipient by body weight has been a major challenge in adult LDLT because it is important to provide an adequate graft mass to the recipient while leaving a sufficient mass of remnant liver in the donor to ensure donor safety.

GROWING POINTS

In adult LDLT, liver grafts have been selected to meet graft-recipient size-matching requirements. In 1996, the Hong Kong group pioneered the use of the right-lobe grafts vein to overcome the volume insufficiency often encountered with the left-lobe liver grafts. Subsequently, the Asan group introduced modified right-lobe grafting with interposition vein grafts to drain the venous outflow of the anterior sector, thus increasing the functioning hepatocyte mass, and this group initiated dual left-lobe liver grafts to overcome both donor risk and volume insufficiency.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT AND CONTROVERSY

Although the surgical procedures for both donors and recipients are more complex for adult LDLT than for whole-organ deceased donor transplantation, the outcomes in large-volume centers are now similar. Accordingly, the indications for adult LDLT are continually being expanded.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

In performing these procedures, it is crucial to minimize the risks of morbidity and mortality to the healthy live donor. This review focuses on the current technical development and discusses the ethical issues of adult LDLT.

[Living donor liver transplantation]

Sixteen years after its first successful application, living donor liver transplantation now has a small but well-established role in treatment for liver failure in Germany. It remains problematic in both child and adult patients concerning effort, expected results, and assessment of risks to the donor. Therefore the method shall remain limited to more research-oriented institutions for the time being before it can be established more broadly as an alternative to postmortal donation. In Germany it presents generally the same limitations as living donor kidney transplantation.

Living donor liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) patients.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical indications, operative procedures and prognosis of LDLT performed on patients with FHF at the University of Tokyo. From January 1996 to August 2007, 96 patients were referred to our department due to severe acute hepatitis or FHF. Of these, 36 underwent LDLT and were the subjects of this study. Of the 36 patients who underwent LDLT, 32 were over 18 years old. The etiologies of FHF included non-A, non-B hepatitis in 23, hepatitis B virus in 11, Wilson's disease in one, and auto-immune hepatitis in one. Graft type included right liver in 18, left liver in 16 and right paramedian sector in two.

RESULTS

Patient and graft survival rates at 5 years were 87% and 82%, respectively. Twenty-three patients had postoperative complications: acute cellular rejection in 12, biliary stricture in eight, bile leakage in six, peritoneal hemorrhage in six and hepatic arterial thrombosis in four.

CONCLUSION

The LDLT procedure provided satisfactory survival rates for FHF patients.

Outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure: the adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study

For acute liver failure (ALF), living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may reduce waiting time and provide better timing compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). However, there are concerns that a partial graft would result in reduced survival of critically ill LDLT recipients and that the rapid evolution of ALF would lead to selection of inappropriate donors. We report outcomes for ALF patients (and their donors) evaluated for LDLT between 1998 and April 2007 from the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort. Of the 1201 potential LDLT recipients, 14 had ALF, only 6 of whom had an identified cause. The median time from listing to first donor evaluation was 1.5 days, and the median time from evaluation to transplantation was 1 day. One patient recovered without liver transplant, 3 of 10 LDLT recipients died, and 1 of 3 DDLT recipients died. Five of the 10 living donors had a total of 7 posttransplant complications. In conclusion, LDLT is rarely performed for ALF, but in selected patients it may be associated with acceptable recipient mortality and donor morbidity.

Living donor liver transplantation of the right lobe for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis in a European center

Living donor liver transplantation of the right lobe might offer the possibility to extend the eligibility criteria of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhosis without penalizing patients who are waiting for a graft from a deceased donor. From 1988 to 2005, surgical treatment of HCC was performed in 580 patients (187 transplantation, 393 resection) in a European center. In the transplantation group, 21 patients with HCC in cirrhosis underwent LDLT (11% of all transplantations for HCC; 22% of 96 LDLT). Solitary HCC were accepted irrespective of their diameter unless vascular invasion was detectable. Multiple HCC nodes were considered acceptable up to a diameter of the largest node of 6 cm and a total tumor diameter of 15 cm. The median follow-up period was 26 months (range, 1-65 months). Vascular invasion had occurred in 12 patients (57%). One patient (4.8%) died within 60 days after transplantation from sepsis. Rates of 3-year survival and 3-year recurrence-free survival were 68% and 64%, respectively. Overall 3-year survival rates in patients with HCC in cirrhosis not meeting the Milan criteria (n = 13) or the San Francisco criteria (n = 8) were 62% and 53%, respectively. LDLT is a safe procedure. However, small sample sizes do not yet permit a definitive comparison to be made between the former results obtained after cadaveric donation. So far, the outcome of the patients is in favor of a careful extension of the selection criteria for HCC in cirrhosis.

Current trends in live liver donation

The introduction of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been one of the most remarkable steps in the field of liver transplantation (LT), able to significantly expand the scarce donor pool in countries in which the growing demands of organs are not met by the shortage of available cadaveric grafts. Although the benefits of this procedure are enormous, the physical and psychological sacrifice of the donors is immense, and the expectations for a good outcome for themselves, as well as for the recipients, are high. We report a current overview of the latest trends in live liver donation in its different aspects (i.e. donor's selection, evaluation, operation, morbidity, mortality, ethics and psychology). This review is based on our center's personal experience with almost 200 LDLTs and a detailed analysis of the international literature of the last 7 years about this topic. Knowing in detail how to approach to the different aspects of living liver donation may be helpful in further improve donor's safety and even recipient's outcome.

Estimation of standard liver volume in Japanese living liver donors

BACKGROUND

Standard liver volume (SLV) is an important concept in adult living liver donor transplantation. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate and modify the authors' previous formula for predicting total liver volume (TLV).

METHODS

The TLV of 301 Japanese living donors was measured by computed tomography. This TLV was then compared with the liver volume calculated using established formulas. The correlation between TLV and several factors including body surface area (BSA) were analyzed and a new equation (SLVn) to better approximate TLV was determined. Factors related to the difference between TLV and SLVn were examined.

RESULTS

Average TLV was 1196.3 +/- 221.0 cm3. Urata's formula underestimated TLV by 17.6 cm3 and the other formulas overestimated it by 120.4-244.9 cm3. TLV could be approximated by BSA; SLVn (cm3) = -404.8 + 961.3 x BSA (m2, R2 = 0.58). SLVn tended to overestimate the TLV of older donors and to underestimate TLV of thin donors.

CONCLUSIONS

A new simple formula is presented that might be a better fit for calculating TLV in Japanese adults. This formula might be useful for evaluating the size of an adequate graft.

Operative outcomes of adult-to-adult right lobe live donor liver transplantation: a comparative study with cadaveric whole-graft liver transplantation in a single center

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the operative and survival outcomes of patients who underwent right lobe live donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) and cadaveric whole-graft liver transplant (CWLT) recipients in a single institution.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Current data suggest that RLDLT has an inferior graft survival outcome when compared with CWLT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective study was performed on 180 consecutive adult patients who underwent primary liver transplantation from January 2000 to February 2004. The operative and survival outcomes of RLDLT (n = 124) were compared with those of CWLT (n = 56).

RESULTS

Fifty-five (44%) and 16 (29%) patients were on high-urgency list in the RLDLT group and the CWLT group, respectively (P = 0.045). The preoperative Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores were comparable in both groups. The waiting time for liver transplantation was significantly shorter in the RLDLT group. The graft weight to estimated standard liver weight ratio was significantly lower in the RLDLT group. The postoperative hospital stay and hospital mortality were comparable in the RLDLT group (1.6%) and the CWLT group (5.4%). Thirty-one (25%) patients in the RLDLT group and 3 (5%) patients in the CWLT group developed biliary stricture on follow-up (P = 0.002). At a median follow-up of 27 months, the actuarial graft and patient survival rates were 88% and 90%, respectively, in the RLDLT group, and both were 84% in the CWLT group.

CONCLUSION

RLDLT results in favorable operative outcomes comparable with those of CWLT. However, there is a significantly higher incidence of biliary stricture associated with RLDLT.

Living donor liver transplantation

The introduction of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been one of the most remarkable steps in the field of liver transplantation (LT). First introduced for children in 1989, its adoption for adults has followed only 10 years later. As the demand for LT continues to increase, LDLT provides life-saving therapy for many patients who would otherwise die awaiting a cadaveric organ. In recent years, LDLT has been shown to be a clinically safe addition to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) and has been able to significantly extend the scarce donor pool. As long as the donor shortage continues to increase, LDLT will play an important role in the future of LT.

Living donor liver transplantation: the historical and cultural basis of policy decisions and ongoing ethical questions

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is in a state of flux. Technical innovations and demand have outpaced internal and external regulatory efforts. This has led to a wide array of centers performing LDLT for a variety of indications without clear evidence on the risks to the donor or recipient or the system as a whole. The birth from necessity of LDLT in Asia has led to the extrapolation of the technique in America and Europe that has not been sufficiently studied in the appropriate populations. While there is a clear benefit in some patients, the appropriate donors and recipients have not been defined. Regulatory and ethical consideration should be focused on minimizing acceptable risk in donors and recipients and expanding the investigation into the costs and outcomes of this challenging procedure. The recently funded adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort sponsored by the National Institutes of Health aims to answer some of these questions over the next five years.

Safety of donor right hepatectomy without abdominal drainage: a prospective evaluation in 100 consecutive liver donors

Although the role of routine abdominal drainage after liver resection for tumors has been questioned, abdominal drainage after donor right hepatectomy for live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been a routine practice in most transplant centers. The present study aimed to evaluate the safety of the procedure without abdominal drainage. A prospective study was performed on 100 consecutive liver donors who underwent right hepatectomy for LDLT from July 2000 to September 2003. Biliary anatomy was carefully studied with intraoperative cholangiography using fluoroscopy. The middle hepatic vein was included in the graft in all except 1 patient. Parenchymal transection was performed using an ultrasonic dissector. The right hepatic duct was transected at the hilum and the stump was closed with 6-O polydioxanone continuous suture. Absence of bile leakage was confirmed with methylene blue solution instilled through the cystic duct stump. The abdomen was closed after careful hemostasis without drainage in all donors. The median age of the donors was 36 years (range 18-56 years). Median operative blood loss and operating time were 350 mL (range 42-1,400 mL) and 7.5 hours (range 5.2-10.7 hours), respectively. None of the donors required any blood or blood product transfusion. There was no operative mortality. The median postoperative hospital stay was 8 days (range 5-30 days). Postoperative morbidity occurred in 19 patients (19%), most of which were minor complications. No donor experienced bile leakage, intraabdominal bleeding, or collection. None required surgical, radiologic, or endoscopic intervention for postoperative complications, except for 1 donor who developed late biliary stricture that required endoscopic dilatation. All donors were well with a median follow-up of 32 months (range 11-50 months). In conclusion, with detailed study of the biliary anatomy and meticulous surgical technique, donor right hepatectomy can be safely performed without abdominal drainage. Abdominal drainage is not a mandatory procedure after donor hepatectomy in LDLT.

Experience after the evaluation of 700 potential donors for living donor liver transplantation in a single center

Adequate selection of donors is a major prerequisite for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Few centers report on the entire number of potential donors considered or rejected for living donation. From April 1998 to July 2003, a total of 111 living donor liver transplantations were performed at our institution, with 622 potential donors for 297 adult recipients and 78 potential donors for 52 pediatric recipients evaluated. In the adult group, only 89 (14%) potential donors were considered suitable, with a total of 533 (86%) potential donors rejected. Of these, 67% were excluded either at initial screening or during the first and second steps of the evaluation procedure. In 31% of all cases, the evaluation of donors was canceled because of recipient issues. In the pediatric group, 22 (28%) donors were selected, with the other 56 (72%) rejected. Costs of the complete evaluation process accounted for 4,589 Euro (Euro) per donor. The evaluation of a potential living donor is a complex and expensive process. We present the results on the evaluation of the largest group of potential donors for adults reported in the literature. Only 14% of potential donors in our series were considered suitable candidates. It has not yet been established who should cover the expenses of the evaluation of all rejected donors. In conclusion, all efforts should be made in order to develop an effective screening protocol for the evaluation of donors with the aim of saving time and resources for a liver transplantation program.

Lessons learned from one hundred right lobe living donor liver transplants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the first 100 adult right lobe living donor liver transplants (LDLT) in a single center to determine whether the results have improved with technical modifications and better experience.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Right lobe LDLT has been increasingly performed for adults with end-stage liver disease. Numerous modifications in technique have been introduced, and a learning curve is likely in view of its complexity.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive adult right lobe LDLTs performed between May 1996 and May 2002 were retrospectively studied by comparing the first 50 (group 1) with the last 50 cases (group 2). The median follow-up was 37 (27 to 79) months for group 1 and 15 (7 to 27) months for group 2.

RESULTS

The characteristics of donors and liver grafts were similar. In group 2, fewer recipients were intensive care unit (ICU)-bound or had hepatorenal syndrome before transplantation, and there was a lower disease severity as shown by a lower Child-Pugh score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Significant improvements were found in the operation time, blood loss, ICU stay, and postoperative complication rate of the donors and in the operation time, transfusion requirements, number of reoperations, ICU stay, and hospital stay of the recipients in group 2. The hospital mortality rate of recipients was reduced from 16% to 0% (P = 0.006). Graft survival rates at 12 months and 24 months were improved from 80% and 74%, respectively, in group 1 to 100% and 96%, respectively, in group 2 (P = 0.002). After adjusting for differences in recipient risk factors (ICU-bound, hepatorenal syndrome, Child-Pugh score, and MELD score) in a multivariate Cox model, recipients in group 2 had significantly lower risk of graft loss (relative risk compared with group 1, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.66; P = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a learning curve in adult right lobe LDLT. The results have significantly improved with technical refinement and better experience.

Lessons learned from one hundred right lobe living donor liver transplants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the first 100 adult right lobe living donor liver transplants (LDLT) in a single center to determine whether the results have improved with technical modifications and better experience.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Right lobe LDLT has been increasingly performed for adults with end-stage liver disease. Numerous modifications in technique have been introduced, and a learning curve is likely in view of its complexity.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive adult right lobe LDLTs performed between May 1996 and May 2002 were retrospectively studied by comparing the first 50 (group 1) with the last 50 cases (group 2). The median follow-up was 37 (27 to 79) months for group 1 and 15 (7 to 27) months for group 2.

RESULTS

The characteristics of donors and liver grafts were similar. In group 2, fewer recipients were intensive care unit (ICU)-bound or had hepatorenal syndrome before transplantation, and there was a lower disease severity as shown by a lower Child-Pugh score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Significant improvements were found in the operation time, blood loss, ICU stay, and postoperative complication rate of the donors and in the operation time, transfusion requirements, number of reoperations, ICU stay, and hospital stay of the recipients in group 2. The hospital mortality rate of recipients was reduced from 16% to 0% (P = 0.006). Graft survival rates at 12 months and 24 months were improved from 80% and 74%, respectively, in group 1 to 100% and 96%, respectively, in group 2 (P = 0.002). After adjusting for differences in recipient risk factors (ICU-bound, hepatorenal syndrome, Child-Pugh score, and MELD score) in a multivariate Cox model, recipients in group 2 had significantly lower risk of graft loss (relative risk compared with group 1, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.66; P = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a learning curve in adult right lobe LDLT. The results have significantly improved with technical refinement and better experience.

The role and limitation of living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is restricted by the scarcity of cadaver grafts. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may potentially increase the applicability but its role and limitation are not clear. We studied the outcome of a cohort of 51 patients with unresectable HCC who were accepted on list for both options of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) and LDLT. Twenty-five of 51 (49%) patients had voluntary living donors (group 1) and 26 did not (group 2). Patients in group 1 were younger, and more often had a MELD score more than 20 or blood group other than O. Twenty-one patients of group 1 underwent LDLT after a median waiting time of 24 days (range, 2-126 days), but 4 did not because the donors were not suitable (HBsAg-positive, 2; ABO-incompatible, 1; liver dysfunction, 1). Of the 30 patients who remained on list, only 6 underwent DDLT after a median waiting time of 344 days (range, 22-1359 days, P <.005). Nineteen died before transplantation and 2 were alive but taken off the list because of disease progression (drop-out rate, 70%). One patient was alive on list and 2 had undergone transplantation outside Hong Kong. The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year intention-to-treat survival rates were 88%, 76%, 66%, and 66%, respectively, for group 1 and 72%, 46%, 38%, and 31%, respectively, for group 2 (relative risk of death for group 1, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.90; P =.029). In conclusion, although complicated factors such as donor voluntarism and selection criteria limit the role of LDLT for HCC, LDLT allows more patients to undergo early transplantation and results in a better outcome.

Live-donor liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure

BACKGROUND

The survival results of patients demonstrating acute-on-chronic liver failure and undergoing live-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have been reported to be poor. This study evaluates the survival outcomes of patients who underwent LDLT using right-lobe liver grafts for acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure.

METHODS

The study comprised 32 patients who demonstrated acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure with mean (+/- standard error of mean) Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores of 36+/-1.8. The mean preoperative intensive care unit stay was 2.4 days. LDLT using a right-lobe liver graft including the middle hepatic vein was performed in all patients. Oral lamivudine 100 mg daily was used for hepatitis B prophylaxis.

RESULTS

The patients received liver grafts that were 52%+/-2% of the estimated standard liver weight. Hospital mortality occurred in two patients, and two other patients died on follow-up. At a median follow-up of 23 months, both patient and graft survival rates were 88%. The survival results were not different from those of 49 patients who underwent right-lobe LDLT for elective conditions during the same study period (graft survival=82%, P=0.55; patient survival=84%, P=0.75). Two (6.3%) patients developed hepatitis B virus DNA breakthrough 47 and 53 months, respectively, after transplantation, but they remained well after treatment with adefovir.

CONCLUSION

Right-lobe LDLT is an effective therapeutic option for patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure. It results in satisfactory survival outcomes comparable to those in patients undergoing LDLT for elective conditions.

Live donor liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure in children

The mortality rate among children with fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) on the waiting list for cadaveric donor liver transplantation (CDLT) is high. Results of emergency CDLT in this situation often are unsatisfactory, and a long-term survival rate less than 30% has been reported. Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for FHF in children has been advocated, but is reported rarely. We present our experience with LDLT in children with FHF. Between September 1993 and December 2002, primary LDLT was performed for 26 children; 8 of these children had FHF. Patient demographics, clinical and laboratory data, surgical details, complications, and graft and patient survival are reviewed. Four boys and four girls received left-lateral segment (n = 7) and full left-lobe (n = 1) grafts. Mean age was 2.9 +/- 1.2 years (range, 3 months to 11 years). Causes of FHF were drug induced in 2 patients and idiopathic in 6 patients. One child received a blood group-incompatible graft. Two patients died; 1 patient of cytomegalovirus infection at 8.6 months and 1 patient of recurrent hepatitis of unknown cause at 2.8 months after LDLT. The child who received a mismatched graft had refractory rejection and underwent a second LDLT with a blood group-compatible graft 19 days afterward. He eventually died of lymphoproliferative disease. Another patient developed graft failure related to venous outflow obstruction and survived after retransplantation with a cadaveric graft. With a median follow-up of 13.2 months (range, 2.8 to 60.3 months), actuarial graft and patient survival rates were 50% and 62.5%, respectively. Survival results appear inferior compared with those of 18 children who underwent LDLT for elective conditions during the same study period (graft survival, 89%; P =.051; patient survival, 89%; P =.281). Although survival outcomes are inferior to those in elective situations, LDLT is a timely and lifesaving procedure for children with FHF.

Living-donor liver transplantation for high-urgency situations

Patients in high-urgency situations for liver transplantation have a high mortality rate while on the waiting list for cadaveric grafts. In countries where cadaveric organ donation is scarce, the use of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) provides the only chance of survival for both pediatric and adult patients. It results in a satisfactory overall survival, from approximately 60% to 75% in pediatric patients and from 70% to 90% in adult patients. Patients who had early LDLT were shown to have a better survival outcome than those who waited for cadaveric organ donation, because a timely graft was available to them before they deteriorated further to multiple organ failure. Patients who were in high-urgency situations for liver transplantation and opted for LDLT were also shown to have significantly better survival outcomes than those who did not opt for this procedure. Although left lobe liver graft can be used successfully in adult-to-adult LDLT in high-urgency situations, there is a trend toward a more frequent use of the larger mass provided by the right lobe of the liver. Adequate venous drainage of the anterior segment of the right lobe liver graft is also considered essential for the favorable outcome of the recipients. Although donor morbidity has been reported to be low in LDLT and no donor death has been reported from Asian transplant centers, standardized definitions of morbidity and better methods for observing and measuring outcomes are necessary to understand and to potentially reduce morbidity.

Right-liver living donor transplantation for decompensated end-stage liver disease

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with decompensated end-stage liver disease (DELD) is controversial. Nevertheless, these patients are most in need of a timely liver transplant. We present the results of 7 patients who underwent transplantation with this procedure and discuss the rationale for its possible broader application. Seven of 51 patients who underwent right LDLT (segments 5 to 8) between August 1998 and April 2001 had DELD, defined as Child-Pugh-Turcotte score greater than 13 or Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score greater than 30. All patients also were listed for cadaveric liver transplantation. Mean age of the 7 transplant recipients was 54 years (range, 44 to 63 years). Three patients had ethyltoxic cirrhosis; 2 patients, hepatitis C; 1 patient, hepatitis B; and 1 patient, autoimmune hepatitis cirrhosis. The average intensive care unit stay was 23 days (range, 3 to 88 days), and average hospital stay was 77 days (range, 27 to 132 days). Three patients are alive 31, 21, and 17 months after LDLT. At a mean follow-up of 15.1 +/- 10 months, patient and graft survival rates are 43%. Four transplant recipients died day 30, 60, 117, and 180 after transplantation. Three of the seven donors (43%) experienced a complication. At present, all donors are well and have returned to their normal activities. No donors had regrets about the procedure, and all donors stated that they would donate again if presented with the same decision. In conclusion, with the lack of other therapeutic options, LDLT represents a timely and effective alternative to cadaveric liver transplantation. Better outcome is foreseeable with a decrease in posttransplantation complications and more experience in predicting survival of these critical patients.

Right-lobe live donor liver transplantation improves survival of patients with acute liver failure

BACKGROUND

Right-lobe live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is used by many liver transplant centres for treating adult patients with terminal liver disease, but its incremental benefit for the intended recipient over cadaveric liver graft transplantation has not been determined. The impact of LDLT as a proactive approach on the outcome of patients with acute liver failure was analysed.

METHODS

From January 1999 to March 2001, right-lobe LDLT was offered proactively to 50 consecutive patients with acute liver failure and their families. The outcome of those who opted for right-lobe LDLT (n = 34) was compared with that of those who did not opt for LDLT (n = 16).

RESULTS

In the group that opted for right-lobe LDLT, 16 patients eventually received a live donor right-lobe graft (14 patients survived) and three patients received a cadaveric liver graft that became available while the potential live donor was undergoing evaluation (all three patients survived). Among the group who did not opt for LDLT, only one patient received a cadaveric liver graft and survived. The former group had a higher overall survival rate (17 of 34 versus one of 16). With a proactive approach, the overall transplant rate was increased from four of 50 to 20 of 50. The morbidity rate among donors was low and none died.

CONCLUSION

Right-lobe LDLT improves the overall survival rate of patients with acute liver failure and should be considered as one of the treatment options for adult patients with acute liver failure.

Lamivudine treatment for fulminant hepatic failure due to acute exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B infection

BACKGROUND

Exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B infection can lead to fulminant hepatic failure with a mortality of up to 90%.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of lamivudine in the treatment of this subgroup of patients.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B infection and fulminant hepatic failure were treated with lamivudine, 100 mg daily. Hepatitis A, C, D and human immunodeficiency virus co-infections and hepatocellular carcinoma were excluded.

RESULTS

The median age was 53 years (range, 24-77 years) with a male predominance of 20:4. Seventeen patients were hepatitis B e antigen positive. Mean hepatitis B virus DNA was 2079 Meq/mL. Eight patients (33%) survived (group A). Thirteen patients died and three patients received liver transplantation (67%) (group B). Baseline laboratory results were comparable between the two groups, including serum albumin, bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, prothrombin time and creatinine. Group B patients had significantly more comorbid illnesses at baseline and more complications, including sepsis and renal failure, compared with group A patients. Six out of eight survivors (75%) had full hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion, but this was not sustained in four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Lamivudine may be useful in treating patients with fulminant hepatic failure due to exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B. Hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion was less durable in this subgroup of patients and long-term therapy may be required.

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure

The outcome of fulminant hepatic failure without timely liver transplantation is poor. We describe a 19-year-old woman with fulminant hepatic failure due to acute hepatitis B infection who received a living donor liver transplant from her sister. The donor's recovery was uneventful, allowing hospital discharge on Day 6. Two months after transplantation the recipient developed a biliary stricture requiring surgery. One year after transplantation, her liver function was normal.

Adult living donor liver transplantation: current status

Living donor liver transplantation was developed in response to a shortage of full-size grafts for children. The progression from reduced-size cadaveric grafts to use of living donors occurred subsequent to expansion of liver anatomy knowledge and practical use of hepatic segments. A major benefit of pediatric live donor liver transplantation is the grafting of children without using livers from the cadaver donor pool. A major drawback of the procedure relates to the need to perform surgery and assign risk to an otherwise healthy individual. The ethical challenge has been discussed in detail and, although not ideal, the procedure "passes muster" on grounds of informed consent and the good of helping another human being. Formidable success appears to have been attained with the adult-to-adult procedure thus far; however, the transplant community still awaits center-specific and compiled data to determine whether the procedure truly reduces adult waiting list times for liver transplant recipients with minimal donor risk.

Liver transplantation. Living donor, hepatocyte, and xenotransplantation

Liver transplantation is now accepted as effective therapy in the treatment of acute and chronic hepatic failure. Improvements in surgical techniques and immune suppression have led to 5-year survival rates that exceed 70% in most centers. The success of transplantation has led to a dramatic increase in the number of candidates to over 14,000 places on the national waiting list. While the number of patients in need of transplantation increases, there has been little growth in the supply of available cadaveric organs, resulting in an organ shortage crisis. With waiting times often exceeding 1 to 2 years, the waiting list mortality now exceeds 10% in most regions. Several novel approaches have been developed to address the growing disparity between the limited supply and excessive demand for suitable organs.

Liver transplantation

Continued discussion over organ allocation and distribution remained a focal point in the field of liver transplantation in the year 2000. Despite the ongoing debate, no significant changes were implemented in the current allocation system. By far, the most widely discussed topic in liver transplantation this year was live donor adult-to-adult liver transplantation. Several authors reported on their initial experience, with both recipient and donor outcomes appearing excellent. As the number of transplant centers performing this procedure increases we look forward to further studies regarding the safety and long-term outcome of this innovative procedure. Studies on viral hepatitis after liver transplantation again focused on the problem of recurrent hepatitis B and hepatitis C. Several small studies found benefit in patients with hepatitis B treated with intramuscular hepatitis B immunoglobulin and lamivudine after transplantation. Although breakthrough replication remains a problem in some patients, these studies offer hope that combination therapy for hepatitis B may provide improved long-term graft survival in these patients. In patients with hepatitis C, several studies focused on identifying risk factors to predict graft recurrence of the virus after liver transplantation. Both cellular rejection and level of viral replication may be important predictors of recurrent hepatitis C virus in the graft. Early treatment reports using interferon and ribavirin suggest that some patients may have a viral response during therapy; however, it is short lived, and tolerance of medication is difficult. Certainly, we look forward to further studies looking at means of prevention and treatment of viral hepatitis in patients undergoing liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation: current status and novel approaches to liver replacement

The major challenge currently facing liver transplantation is the performance of a greater number of liver transplants, which has been fueled by the large and growing disparity between the increasing number of qualified patients listed for transplantation and the relatively static number of available cadaver donor organs. In the past 2 years, approximately 4500 liver transplants have been performed annually, with 1-year survival rates in the 85%-90% range, while the waiting list has expanded as of November 2000 to more than 16,000 patients, resulting in an increasing death rate among listed patients. In the short term, there will continue to be a major focus on more effective use of available cadaver donor organs to balance the competing principles of justice (patients with most urgent need for transplant and lower probability of posttransplant survival) and medical utility (patients with less urgent need for transplant and higher odds of postoperative survival). Over the long term, there will be an increasing application of novel approaches to liver replacement including cadaver split liver transplantation and adult living donor liver transplantation and possibly, in the more distant future, xenotransplantation and hepatocyte transplantation. The treatment, and ideally the prevention, of recurrent disease after liver transplantation, particularly chronic hepatitis C-the most common indication for transplantation-is a major priority to optimize the use of liver grafts. Finally, improved immunosuppressive strategies, including movement toward minimal immunosuppression and steroid withdrawal and the development of safer and more effective drugs, is another important factor that has the potential to increase the success of liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation in Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B using lamivudine prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

To report the results of liver transplantation in 31 Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B using lamivudine prophylaxis in an open-label study.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Chronic hepatitis B is a prevalent cause of end-stage liver disease in Asia, but the results of liver transplantation in these patients are poor.

METHODS

Thirty-one Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B underwent liver transplantation using lamivudine prophylaxis (100 mg daily). Twenty-three (74%) patients had detectable serum hepatitis B envelope antigen (n = 18) or hepatitis B virus DNA (n = 11) before treatment, and seven had associated hepatocellular carcinoma. Lamivudine was continued indefinitely after transplantation, and hepatitis B immune globulin was not used.

RESULTS

The actuarial patient and graft survival rates were 84% and 81%, respectively. Five patients died of causes unrelated to hepatitis B, and 26 patients were alive at a median follow-up of 16 months (range 6-47) after transplantation. One (3.8%) patient developed recurrent hepatitis B resulting from viral breakthrough at week 53 and survived after retransplantation using adefovir and hepatitis B immune globulin treatment. The remaining 25 surviving patients had no biochemical or histologic evidence of recurrent hepatitis, and serum hepatitis B virus DNA remained negative by polymerase chain reaction. In six patients, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) persisted or reappeared in serum. Among 19 patients who became negative for HBsAg from 5 to 431 days after transplantation, 13 developed anti-HBsAb that lasted a median of 6 months (range 1-21). None of the seven patients with hepatocellular carcinoma developed recurrent tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B may achieve a good outcome after liver transplantation using lamivudine prophylaxis.

Liver transplantation

Survival after liver transplantation has steadily improved, in part because of newer immunosuppression, which may offer decreased long-term side effects. Reduction of steroids early in the course of transplant continues to be a goal, with satisfactory results in terms of both risk of rejection and reduction of side effects. Dominating the literature and the press in 1999 was the controversy surrounding the way in which livers are allocated. Regulation by the federal government was proposed to change the way the United Network of Organ Sharing distributes and allocates livers. Prompted by the shortage of organs, living-donor liver transplantation has blossomed. Continued experience in pediatric patients has shown excellent survival rate and quality of life. In adults, further experience is being gained with respect to the use of right lobes for transplantation. Early data suggest that this is a potential alternative to cadaveric transplantation in adults, with acceptable risk to the donor. Despite advances made in improving the technical aspects of transplantation, recurrent disease remains a significant issue. Lamivudine appears to be a potent inhibitor of hepatitis B virus DNA replication after liver transplantation, although resistance remains a significant problem. Further review of transplantation for hepatitis C virus is encouraging, with excellent five-year survival rate. However, studies evaluating the evolution of fibrosis in these patients throw caution on those results, showing increased progression to cirrhosis over time. Further follow-up of these patients is needed to more accurately assess long-term impact of hepatitis C on morbidity and mortality rates after liver transplantation.