Dual-graft Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation: An Innovative Surgical Procedure for Live Liver Donor Pool Expansion

Safety of right liver donation after improving steatosis through weight loss in living donors: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation using hepatic steatosis-improved grafts mitigates donor shortage. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of right-lobe adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation using grafts improved through donor weight loss.

METHODS

In this retrospective study conducted in a single institution in the Republic of Korea, we reviewed the medical records of living liver donors who lost ≥ 10% of their body weight to improve steatosis before right lobe donation between January 2015 and December 2020. Overall, 1040 right-lobe donors were included, with 150 and 890 donors in the weight loss and control (non-steatosis) groups, respectively.

RESULTS

We performed 1:1 individual matching using the greedy matching method, by which 124 patients were included in each group. The median period from the date of the first visit to donation was 113 (interquartile range: 78-184) days in the weight loss group. As body weight changed from 82.8 ± 13.7 kg to 70.8 ± 11.8 kg (p < 0.0001), body mass index also improved from 27.8 ± 3.9 kg/m2 to 23.8 ± 3.1 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). No significant between-group differences existed in the postoperative laboratory data for living donors and recipients. The incidence of postoperative complications in donors was comparable between the groups (control group, 9.7%; weight loss group, 13.7%; p = 0.3185). The graft and recipient survival rates were comparable between the groups (p = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Weight loss through diet and exercise significantly could improve hepatic steatosis in living donor candidates for liver transplantation, with the surgical outcomes in recipients and donors being equivalent to those in recipients and non-steatotic donors.

Advocating for a "shift-to-left" in transplant oncology: left grafts, RAPID and dual graft

The extension of liver transplantation to new oncologic indications might exacerbate the shortage of grafts. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may emerge as a viable resource, although its diffusion in the Western world is still very limited. Several groups have advocated for minimizing the impact on donors by reducing the extent of donor hepatectomy, i.e., shifting from right-lobe to left-lobe or left-lateral segment donation ("shift-to-left"). This is particularly relevant when dealing with non-established indications and could make it more acceptable both for potential donors and for the recipients. Left grafts can be transplanted straightforward, despite a higher risk of small-for-size syndrome, or they can be used in the setting of dual-graft LDLT or RAPID procedures, despite technical complexity. This review will expose the most relevant features of each technique, highlighting their strengths and pitfalls and focusing on outcomes. This wide set of tools should be available at high-volume transplant centers, to propose the best technique to adapt to donor-recipient matching.

Reconstruction of all hepatic arteries in right lobe grafts with 2 hepatic arteries and zero percent hepatic artery thrombosis

Hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) is a common cause of graft loss in living-donor liver transplantation, occurring in ~2.5%-8% of patients. Some right lobe grafts have 2 hepatic arteries (HAs), and the optimal reconstruction technique remains controversial. This study aimed to identify risk factors for HAT and to evaluate the efficacy of reconstructing 2 HAs in right lobe grafts. This retrospective, single-center study analyzed 1601 living-donor liver transplantation recipients with a right liver graft and divided them into 1 HA (n = 1524) and 2 HA (n = 77) groups. The reconstruction of all HAs was performed using a microscope with an interrupted suture. The primary outcome was any HAT event. Of the 1601 patients, 37.8% had a history of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, and 130 underwent pretransplant hepatectomy. Extra-anatomical arterial reconstruction was performed in 38 cases (2.4%). HAT occurred in 1.2% of patients (20/1601) who underwent surgical revascularization. In the multivariate analysis, undergoing pretransplant hepatectomy ( p = 0.008), having a female donor ( p = 0.02), having a smaller graft-to-recipient weight ratio ( p = 0.002), and undergoing extra-anatomical reconstruction ( p = 0.001) were identified as risk factors for HAT. However, having 2 HA openings in right liver grafts was not a risk factor for HAT in our series. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant difference in graft survival and patient survival rates between the 1 HA and 2 HA groups ( p = 0.09, p = 0.97). In our series, although the smaller HA in the 2 HA group should increase the risk of HAT, HAT did not occur in this group. Therefore, reconstructing both HAs when possible may be a reasonable approach in living-donor liver transplantation using a right liver graft with 2 HA openings.

Outcomes of 6000 living donor liver transplantation procedures: a pioneering experience at ASAN Medical Center

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has emerged as a favorable alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation, significantly reducing waitlist mortality, particularly in Asian countries with very low deceased organ donation rates. Asan Medical Center (AMC) in South Korea has pioneered innovative LDLT surgical techniques and become established as an extremely high-volume center for LDLT. This retrospective study analyzed 6000 consecutive LDLT procedures, including 510 dual-graft procedures, performed at AMC between December 1994 and January 2021. Of these, 312 LDLT procedures were performed in children aged < 18 years. In adult recipients, liver cirrhosis (LC) related to viral hepatitis was the most common indication, occurring in 69.8% of cases. Biliary atresia (46.8%) was the most common indication for pediatric LDLT. This study demonstrated outstanding long-term outcomes, with patient survival rates at 1, 5, 10, and 20 years of 92.7%, 85.9%, 82.1%, and 70.9%, respectively, in LDLT group for adults aged 50 and under at the time of LDLT, and 92.9%, 89.0%, 88.1%, and 81.9%, respectively, in the pediatric group. The in-hospital mortality rate of adult recipients was 3.8% (n = 214/5688). This study demonstrates the importance of refined surgical techniques, selection of grafts tailored to the recipient, and comprehensive multidisciplinary perioperative patient care in expanding the scope of LDLT and improving recipient 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.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Left Lobe or Right Lobe

Living Donor Liver Transplantation (LDLT) has seen great advancements since its inception in 1988. Herein, the nuances of LDLT are discussed spanning from donor evaluation to the recipient operation. Special attention is given to donor anatomy and graft optimization techniques in the recipient.

Benefit and harm of waiting time in liver transplantation for HCC

Liver transplantation is the most successful treatment for limited-stage HCC. The waiting time for liver transplantation (LT) can be a critical factor affecting the oncological prognosis and outcome of patients with HCC. Efficient strategies to optimize waiting time are essential to maximize the benefits of LT and to reduce the harm of delay in transplantation. The ever-increasing demand for donor livers emphasizes the need to improve the organization of the waiting list for transplantation and to optimize organ availability for patients with and without HCC. Current progress in innovations to expand the donor pool includes the implementation of living donor LT and the use of grafts from extended donors. By expanding selection criteria, an increased number of patients are eligible for transplantation, which necessitates criteria to prevent futile transplantations. Thus, the selection criteria for LT have evolved to include not only tumor characteristics but biomarkers as well. Enhancing our understanding of HCC tumor biology through the analysis of subtypes and molecular genetics holds significant promise in advancing the personalized approach for patients. In this review, the effect of waiting time duration on outcome in patients with HCC enlisted for LT is discussed.

Preliminary study of donor volume changes after dual-graft liver transplantation in rats

Dual-graft liver transplantation (DGLT) expands the pool of donors, ensures the safety of the donors, and treats a potential small for size syndrome (SFSS). However, some of the recipient graft showed atrophy. The cause and mechanism of the unbalanced proliferation and atrophy of dual grafts after clinical DGLT have not been clarified. We established and optimized the rat model of DGLT to explore the causes of growth unbalance. Continuously and dynamically observed bilateral graft volume and portal vein blood flow change by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US). We detected liver function indexes: alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), total bilirubin (TBIL), direct bilirubin (DBIL), and indirect bilirubin (IBIL). Liver samples from receptors were obtained for morphology, and apoptosis was measured by RT-PCR and western blot. Optimization of the model improved the 7-day survival rate from former 58.3% to 87.5%, and the 30-day survival rate was 68.8%. The volume of the right graft gradually increased, and the left graft atrophied during the 30-day observation period. The portal blood flow of the left graft gradually decreased until the 30th day (0.13 ± 0.01 ml/s) compared with the sham group (0.63 ± 0.05 ml/s), and the right graft significantly increased on the 30th day (0.75 ± 0.11ml/s). The liver function initially increased and then recovered. The total volume (12.52 ± 1.60 ml vs 4.47 ± 0.08 ml) and weight (12.09 ± 1 g vs 4.91 ± 0.18 g) of the graft increased significantly compared to pre-transplantation and reached the level of the sham operation group on the 30th day. The volume and weight of the right graft increased more than those of the left graft (P < 0.05). There was more inflammatory cell infiltration in the left graft, and the right graft had obvious proliferation of hepatocytes and mature bile duct cells. Left grafts were more prone to apoptosis than right grafts (P < 0.05). In conclusion, growth of the right graft is superior to the left; after double liver transplantation, perfusion blood flow and apoptosis may be the reason contributing to the volume differences in dual grafts.

Dual Graft Living Donor Liver Transplantation for High Acuity Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Background

The outcomes of dual graft living donor liver transplantation (DGLDLT) in high acuity patients remain underreported. The objective of this study was to report long-term outcomes from a single center in this select group of patients.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent DGLDLT between 2012 and 2017 (n = 10). High acuity patients were defined as patients with model for end stage liver disease (MELD) ≥30 or Child Pugh score ≥11. We looked at 90-day morbidity and mortality and 5-year overall survival (OS).

Results

The median MELD score and Child Pugh score were 30 (26.7-35) and 11 (11-11.2). The median recipient weight was 105 (95.2-113.7) and ranged from 82 to 132 kg. Out of 10 patients, 4 (40%) required perioperative renal replacement therapy, and 8 (80%) required hospital admission for optimization. The estimated graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR) with right lobe graft alone was <0.8 in all patients, between 0.75 and 0.65 in 5 (50%) patients, and <0.65 in 5 (50%) patients. The 90-day mortality was 3/10 (30%), and there were 3/10 (30%) deaths during long-term follow-up. Among 155 high acuity patients, the 1-year OS with standard LDLT, standard LDLT with GRWR <0.8, and DGLDLT was 82%, 76%, and 58%, respectively (P = 0.123). With a median follow-up of 40.6 (1.9-74.4) months, the 5-year OS for DGLDLT was 50%.

Conclusion

The use of DGLDLT in high acuity patients should be prudent and low GRWR grafts should be considered a viable alternative in selected patients.

Liver Paired Exchange: Programmatic Hopes and Fears

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

Role of the Intramural Vascular Network of the Extrahepatic Bile Duct for the Blood Circulation in the Recipient Extrahepatic Bile Duct Used for Duct-to-Duct-Biliary-Anastomosis in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

A duct-to-duct-biliary-anastomosis is the preferred biliary reconstruction technique in liver transplantation; biliary complications remain the major concerns for the technique. We examined the significance of the intramural vascular network of the extrahepatic bile duct (EBD) and its relevant vessels. We microscopically examined the axial sections of the EBD with 5 mm intervals of 10 formalin-fixed deceased livers. The luminal-areas of the 3 and 9 o’clock arteries correlated significantly and positively with the distance from the bifurcation of the right and left hepatic ducts (the 3 o’clock artery, r = 0.42, p < 0.001; the 9 o’clock artery, r = 0.39, p < 0.001); the ratios of the numbers of the intramural vessels to the areas of the corresponding sections of the EBD significantly correlated positively with the distance from the bifurcation of the right and left hepatic ducts (total vessels, r = 0.78, p < 0.001; arterioles, r = 0.52, p < 0.001; venules, r = 0.45, p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that there is a significant locoregional distributional heterogeneity of the intramural vessels among the EBD. The hepatic arteries neighboring the EBD primarily supply the blood flow to the EBD; thus, when the broader isolation of the EBD from the neighboring arteries is necessary, this locoregional distributional heterogeneity of the intramural vessels may render the EBD likely to suffer ischemia of the anastomotic site.

Atrophy of the Left Graft Secondary to Arterial Inflow Failure in Dual Liver Transplantation

Hepatic arterial flow may have a profound influence on the regeneration process and intergraft competition in dual graft liver transplant. Here, we report a case of impaired left hepatic arterial flow and left lobe graft atrophy in a dual graft recipient. A 52-year-old male patient with hepatitis C-related liver cirrhosis received the right liver lobe from his daughter together with the left lobe from his brother to get an adequate graft volume (65.1% of standard liver volume). The left lobe graft was orthotopically placed to the recipient's left lobe position. The left hepatic artery of the graft was anastomosed to the common hepatic artery of the recipient, for which the recipient's great saphenous vein was used as an interposition graft. Impaired left hepatic arterial inflow perfusion was observed on postoperative day 7, whereas right hepatic arterial flow and portal and venous flows in both grafts were excellent. The recipient now has a normal life with normal liver function tests. A computed tomography scan taken 1.5 years posttransplant demonstrated complete atrophy of the left graft and compensatory regeneration of the right graft. The left graft atrophy may be directly attributed to left hepatic arterial inflow failure in this case.

Expanding Donor Selection and Recipient Indications for Living Donor Liver Transplantation

There is an acute shortage of deceased donor organs for liver transplantation in the United States. Nearly a third of patients either die or become too sick for transplant while on the transplant waitlist. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) bridges the gap between demand and supply of organs for liver transplantation. This article reviews current living donor selection criteria, and avenues for expansion of criteria with novel surgical techniques and ongoing outcomes research. Ways in which institutions can establish and expand LDLT programs using the Living Donor Champion model are discussed. Efforts to expand recipient indications for LDLT are described.

Over 500 Liver Transplants Including More Than 400 Living-Donor Liver Transplants in 2019 at Asan Medical Center

BACKGROUND

More than 400 liver transplants were performed at Asan Medical Center (AMC) in 2011, and over 500 liver transplants including 420 living-donor liver transplants (LDLTs) were performed in 2019. Herein, we report the methodology of these procedures.

METHODS

Since the first adult LDLTs at AMC using the left and right lobes were successfully performed, various innovative techniques and approaches have been developed: modified right lobe, dual graft, donor exchange for ABO incompatibility, expansion of indications and no-touch techniques for hepatocellular carcinoma, intraoperative cine-portogram and additional intervention for large collaterals, management of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and stenosis, salvage LDLT after major hepatectomy, and timely LDLT for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty LDLTs in 403 adult and 17 pediatric patients and 85 deceased-donor liver transplants in 74 adult and 11 pediatric patients were performed. The number of deceased-donor liver transplants remained constant since 2011, but the number of LDLTs increased steadily. One hundred thirty patients (25.7%) required urgent liver transplantations and 24 patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure underwent LDLT. PVT including grade 1,2,3, and 4 was reported in 91 patients (18.0%), and Yerdel's grade 2, 3, and 4 PVT was reported in 47 patients (51.6%); all patients with PVT were successfully treated. Adult LDLTs for hepatocellular carcinoma and ABO incompatibility accounted for 52.6% and 24.3% of the cases, respectively. In-hospital mortality in 2019 was 2.97%.

CONCLUSION

Continual efforts to overcome challenging problems in LDLT with various innovations and dedication of the team members during the perioperative period to improve patient outcomes were crucial in increasing the number of liver transplantations at Asan Medical Center.

Necrosectomy of hepatic left lateral section after blunt abdominal trauma in a patient who underwent central hepatectomy and bile duct resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

When the liver is divided into the right and left halves after central hepatectomy, a serious injury to the one half of the liver can destroy the ipsilateral half. We report a case showing total necrosis of the hepatic left lateral section (LLS) caused by blunt abdominal trauma in a patient who had undergone central hepatectomy and bile duct resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. A 47-year-old female patient was transferred because of postoperative status following blunt abdominal trauma. Five years before, she had been diagnosed with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Since the tumor extent was compatible with Bismuth-Corlette type IV, she underwent central hepatectomy and bile duct resection. After five years, she experienced an industrial safety accident, in which a heavy refrigerator fell over her body. She underwent emergency duodenal diversion surgery with distal gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy. During this surgery, serious ischemic injury of the LLS with occlusion of the left portal vein and hepatic artery was identified, but not treated. After three weeks, LLS necrosectomy with repair of the jejunal limb was done. Postoperative bile leak developed and required supportive care for two months for its healing. She is currently doing well without any physical discomfort four months after the necrosectomy. Our experience with this case suggests that an injury to the afferent jejunal limb requires an individualized treatment strategy including long-standing waiting with effective drainage for spontaneous healing. The experience of this case appears to be theoretically matched with late-stage resection of LLS following central hepatectomy and bile duct resection.

Current status of liver transplantation in Asia

In spite of early adoption of the brain death legislation, and all efforts at promoting deceased donation, various social, economic and cultural factors have acted as road blocks to the furthering of deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in most Asian societies. On the other hand, Asian liver transplant centers have been the pioneers, innovators, and technical advancement catalysts for the world to follow, especially with regards to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). With some high volume centers performing more than 200 LDLTs a year with good outcomes in the donor and recipient, techniques to expand the living donor pool have also been adopted like ABO-incompatible, paired exchange and dual lobe living donor liver transplants. Although large multicenter, and registry data as regards safety and outcomes of minimally invasive donor hepatectomy are awaited, expert centers have pioneered, and now regularly perform purely laparoscopic and robotic living donor hepatectomies, especially in Korea.

Biliary Complications After Single- and Dual-Graft Living-Donor Liver Transplantation Using a Right Posterior Section Graft of Donor with a Type III Portal Vein Variation

BACKGROUND

When the donor's left lobe volume is <30%, donor selection for the right posterior section graft (RPSG) is based on the type III portal vein (PV) anatomic variation. Herein, we validated the selection of a donor with a type III PV variation for RPSG to prevent biliary complications (BCs) after single-graft (SG) and dual-graft (DG) living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

The clinical data of recipients and donors with a type III PV variation for LDLT using an RPSG performed between January 2004 and June 2018 were retrospectively collected and analyzed to determine the occurrence of BCs.

RESULTS

The 26 LDLTs performed using an RPSG, including 20 DG LDLT cases, accounted for 0.6% of all LDLT cases (n=4292). BCs developed in 6 recipients (23.0%), including biliary stricture in 4 (15.3%) and bile leakage in 2 (7.6%). No vascular complications occurred. The RPSG volume was significantly smaller in recipients with BCs than in those without BCs (400.8±79.9 vs 504.1±96.5 mL, P = .015). The bile duct types were A, B, C1, C2, and D in 6 (18.8%), 5 (15.6%), 3 (9.4%), 13 (40.6%), and 5 (15.6%) patients, respectively. All the RPSGs had a single-orifice bile duct. The bile duct size of the RPSG was relatively smaller in recipients with BCs than in those without BCs (2.8±1.0 vs 3.6±1.4 mm, P = .237).

CONCLUSIONS

When the left liver volume is disproportionately small, selection of a donor with a type III PV variation can prevent BCs after SG and DG LDLTs using an RPSG.

Living donor liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As experience grows, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an effective treatment option to overcome the deceased donor organ shortage.

RECENT FINDINGS

Donor safety is the highest priority in LDLT. Strict donor selection according to structured protocols and center experience are the main factors that determine donor safety. However, with increased experience, many centers have explored increasing organ availability within living donation by means of ABO incompatible LDLT, dual graft LDLT, and anonymous living donation. Also, this growing experience in LDLT has allowed the transplant community to cautiously explore the role of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma outside of Milan criteria and patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases.

SUMMARY

LDLT has become established as a viable strategy to ameliorate the organ shortage experienced by centers around the world. Improved understanding of this technique has allowed the improved utilization of live donor graft resources, without compromising donor safety. Moreover, LDLT may offer some advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation and a unique opportunity to assess the broader applicability of liver transplantation.

ABO incompatible living donor liver transplantation using dual grafts and pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy: A case report

RATIONALE

Because of the shortage of deceased donors, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become the main procedure to treat patients with end-stage liver disease in Asian countries. However, many potential donors are excluded because of donor safety and graft volume issues. In addition, large abdominal wounds after open surgery for hepatectomy could be a reason for hesitating to agree to liver donation, particularly when attempting to recruit young female donors.

PATIENT CONCERNS

On volumetric computed tomography (CT) examination, remnant liver volume was too small to guarantee the safety of the male donor, and the right hemiliver volume of the female donor was not sufficient to meet the recipient's metabolic demand. The young female donor also worried about a large abdominal wound following open surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

We performed ABO-incompatible LDLT using dual grafts and right-sided graft was obtained by pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy in a young female donor.

OUTCOMES

The postoperative course was uneventful in both donors and the recipient is presently doing well in satisfactory condition 7 months after liver transplantation.

LESSONS

We overcame these volumetric and cosmetic issues through dual living donor liver grafts using a combination of conventional surgery for 1 donor and laparoscopic right hepatectomy for a second ABO-incompatible donor. We think this procedure can be a good option for the expansion of donor pools.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Technical Innovations

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has found a place to serve the end-stage liver disease community as the donor safety and recipient suitability has been elucidated. Donor safety is of paramount importance and transplant programs must continue endeavors to maintain the highest possible standards. At the same time, adequacy of grafts based on recipient clinical status via their model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and volumetric studies to achieve a GRBWR >0.8, along with special attention to anatomic tailoring and portal venous flow optimization are necessary for successful transplantation. Technical innovations have improved sequentially the utility and availability of LDLT.

Dual-graft adult living donor liver transplantation with ABO-incompatible graft: short-term and long-term outcomes

ABO-incompatible (ABOi) dual-graft (DG) adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is not commonly performed due to its inherently intricate surgical technique and immunological complexity. Therefore, data are lacking on the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of ABOi DG ALDLT. We performed a retrospective study by reviewing the medical records of patients who underwent ABOi DG ALDLT between 2008 and 2014. Additionally, computed tomography volumetric analysis was conducted to assess the graft regeneration rate. The mean age of a total of 28 recipients was 50.2 ± 8.5 years, and the mean model for end-stage liver disease score was 12.2 ± 4.6. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival rate was 96.4% during the mean follow-up period of 57.0 ± 22.4 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival rate was 96.4%, 94.2%, and 92.0%, respectively, and no significant differences were observed between ABO-compatible (ABOc) and ABOi grafts (P = .145). The biliary complication rate showed no significant difference (P = .195) between ABOc and ABOi grafts. Regeneration rates of ABOi grafts were not significantly different from those of ABOc grafts. DG ALDLT with ABOi and ABOc graft combination seems to be a feasible option for expanding the donor pool without additional donor risks.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients Older Than Age 70 Years: A Single-Center Experience

Over the past two decades, the age of liver transplantation (LT) recipients has been increasing. We reviewed our experience with LT for patients aged ≥70 years (range: 70-78 years) and investigated the feasibility of performing LT, especially living donor LT (LDLT), for older patients. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 25 patients (15 LDLT recipients, 10 deceased donor LT recipients) aged ≥70 years who underwent LT from January 2000 to April 2016. Their perioperative morbidity rate was 28.0%, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 16.0%; these results were comparable to those of matched patients in their 60s (n = 73; morbidity, p = 0.726; mortality, p = 0.816). For patients in their 70s, the 1- and 5-year patient survival rates were 84.0% and 69.8%, and the 1- and 5-year graft survival rates were 83.5% and 75.1%, respectively. Comparisons of patient and graft survival rates between matched patients in their 60s and 70s showed no statistically significant differences (patient survival, p = 0.372; graft survival, p = 0.183). Our experience suggests that patients aged ≥70 years should not be excluded from LT, or even LDLT, based solely on age and implies that careful selection of recipients and donors as well as meticulous surgical technique are necessary for successful results.

Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in High-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score Patients

The large volume of adult living donor liver transplantations (ALDLTs) at our center affords a unique opportunity to examine the impact of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) among high-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease MELD score patients. From February 1998 to March 2010, 1958 cirrhotic recipients were analyzed to study the relationship between MELD scores and ALDLT outcomes. A total of 327 high-MELD score recipients were categorized into ACLF and non-ACLF groups, and their outcomes were compared. The 5-year graft and patient survival in the high-MELD group were 75.2% and 76.4%, respectively, which were significantly worse than the low and intermediate MELD groups. The presence of ACLF associated with higher MELD scores appeared to be the dominant factor responsible for the inferior results of patients with MELD score of 30-34 points. The 5-year graft survivals in the ACLF group was 70.5% and in the non-ACLF group it was 81.0% (p = 0.035). Therefore, ALDLT should be performed as soon as possible in high-MELD score patients prior to ACLF development. Moreover, ACLF patients should be separately categorized when analyzing the outcomes of ALDLT. ALDLT for ACLF patients should not be discouraged because favorable outcomes can be expected through timely ALDLT and comprehensive management.