Pushing the frontiers of living donor right hepatectomy

Indications and results of right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

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

Selective hanging maneuver and rubber band retraction technique for pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) is an increasingly performed procedure despite its technical difficulties. This study introduced a selective liver parenchymal hanging maneuver and rubber band retraction technique for PLDH.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed perioperative data from 58 patients who underwent donor right hepatectomy (including right extended) between March 2009 and February 2021. Eighteen patients underwent open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH) and 38 patients underwent pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH).

RESULTS

All PLDRH donors underwent the procedure without the need for open conversion. The median PLDRH operative time was 396.84 ± 72.459 min, the median PLDRH intraoperative bleeding amount was 496.05 ± 272.591 ml, and the warm ischemic time was 8.77 ± 3.062 min. Compared to ODRH, laparoscopic surgery showed further advantages in terms of postoperative hospital stay (10.94 ± 4.036 days vs. 8.03 ± 2.646 days, respectively, P = 0.01) and estimated blood loss (676.67 ± 321.046 ml vs. 496.05 ± 272.591 ml, respectively, P = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

The selective liver parenchymal hanging maneuver and rubber band retraction technique is a simple and effective pure laparoscopic procedure for donor hepatectomy. Our results demonstrate the safety and feasibility of this technique.

Improving Safety in Living Liver Donation: Lessons From Intraoperative Adverse Events in 438 Donors Undergoing a Left Liver Resection

Background

Donor safety is paramount in living organ donation. Left liver resections are considered safer than right lobe hepatectomies. However, unexpected intraoperative adverse events (iAEs), defined as any deviation from the ideal intraoperative course, can also occur during left liver resections and may be life threatening or lead to postoperative complication or permanent harm to the donor and recipient.

Methods

Records of 438 liver living donors (LDs) who underwent 393 left lateral sectionectomies (LLSs) and 45 left hepatectomies (LHs) between July 1993 and December 2018 in a pediatric living-donor liver transplantation center were reviewed for the appearance of iAEs that could have influenced the donor morbidity and mortality and that could have contributed to the improvement of the LD surgical protocol.

Results

Clinical characteristics of LLS and LH groups were comparable. Nine iAEs were identified, an incidence of 2%, all of them occurring in the LLS group. Seven of them were related to a surgical maneuver (5 associated with vascular management and 2 with the biliary tree approach). One iAE was associated with an incomplete donor workup and the last with drug administration. Each iAE resulted in subsequent changes in the surgical protocol. Donor outcome was at risk by 5 iAEs classed as type a, recipient outcome by 2 iAEs (type b) and both by 2 iAEs (type c). Postoperative complications occurred in 87 LDs (19.9%), with no differences between the LLS and LH groups (P = 0.227). No Clavien-Dindo class IVa or b complications or donor mortality (Clavien-Dindo class V) were observed.

Conclusions

iAEs debriefings induced changes in our LD protocol and may have contributed to reduced morbidity and zero mortality. iAEs analysis can be used as a quality and safety improvement tool in the context of LD procedures, which may include right liver donation, laparoscopic, and robotic living liver graft procurement.

Perioperative management of living donor liver transplantation: Part 2 - Donors

Living donor liver transplantation was first developed to mitigate the limited access to deceased donor organs in Asia in the 1990s. This alternative liver transplantation method has become a widely practiced and established transplantation option for adult patients suffering with end-stage liver disease, and it has successfully helped address the shortage of deceased donors. The Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia and the Korean Society of Transplantation Anesthesiologists jointly reviewed published studies on the perioperative management of adult live liver donors undergoing donor hemi-hepatectomy. The goal of the review is to offer transplant anesthesiologists and critical care physicians a comprehensive overview of the perioperative management of adult live donors. We featured the current status, donor selection process, outcomes and complications, surgical procedure, anesthetic management, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols, avoidance of blood transfusion, and considerations for emergency donation. Recent surgical advances, including laparoscopic donor hemi-hepatectomy and robotic laparoscopic donor surgery, are also addressed.

The impact of liver steatosis on the postoperative evolution after right lobe living-donor hepatectomy

Background

Living donor liver transplantation has become a feasible treatment modality for end-stage liver disease. The obesity epidemic worldwide has made it increasingly common to encounter liver steatosis in living donor candidates. The aim of study was to analyze the impact of moderate hepatic steatosis on the postoperative evolutions after right lobe living-donor hepatectomy.

Methods

Living donors who underwent donor hepatectomy during the period 2000 to 2020 in two medical centers were included in this study. We distinguished 3 groups based on the degree of steatosis: Group O - 0%, Group I - 1-10% and Group II >10%.

Results

A total number of 157 living donors underwent surgery, of whom 112 (71.34%) were right lobe liver donors. There were 62 without steatosis, 31 - with steatosis 1-10% and 19 with steatosis >10%. No difference has been found in proportion of men, median of age, body mass index and left lobe/total liver volume ration in compared groups. Total liver volume was significantly higher in the Group I than in the Group O (p=0.028). The moderate hepatic steatosis (HS) group presented significant higher volume of intraoperative hemorrhage than no-HS group (p=0.041). No differences were observed in the postoperative liver function between the groups. The minimal HS group comprised a significantly higher proportion of postoperative complications than no-HS group (67.7% vs 40.3%, p=0.043). The longer postoperative length of hospital stay in ICU was observed in Group I than in Group O (p=0.024).

Conclusion

Moderate HS does not importantly impair living liver donors' safety.

Short-term Outcomes of "Difficult" Laparoscopic Liver Resection at Specialized Centers: Report From INSTALL (International Survey on Technical Aspects of Laparoscopic Liver Resection)-2 on 4478 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To define the current status of "difficult" LLR, a global database was created and investigated.

BACKGROUND

In the Second International Consensus Conference in 2014, minor LLR was considered as a standard practice and major LLR remained an innovative procedure. Since then, no updates on worldwide trends have been available.

METHODS

A questionnaire on all consecutive patients who underwent difficult LLR (major hepatectomy, posterosuperior segmentectomy, sectionectomy, living donor hepatectomy, tumor size ≥10 cm, Child-Pugh grade ≥B, combined with biliary reconstruction, and Iwate criteria difficulty score ≥7) in 2014-2018 was distributed via email to 65 high-volume LLR centers worldwide. Individual data on patient and tumor demographics, surgical information, and short-term outcomes were obtained to create a large-scale international registry for analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 58 centers in 19 countries performed 4478 difficult LLR (median, 58.5; range, 5-418) during the study period. Hepatocellular carcinoma accounted for ≥40% of all indications. Half of the patients underwent major hepatectomy, followed by sectionectomy, posterosuperior segmentectomy, and living donor hepatectomy. In the vast majority of procedures, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa complication rates of ≈10% and 90-day mortality rates of ≈1% were achieved. Left or right trisectionectomy had the worst Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa complication rate of ≥10% and 90-day mortality rate of 5%-10%. No significant correlation was observed between center volume and short-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Total 4478 patients underwent difficult LLR worldwide in 2014-2018. Most procedures are safe and feasible when conducted in specialized centers.

Impact of ABO-incompatibility on hepatic artery thrombosis in living donor liver transplantation

Background

The current era of rituximab-based regimens brought improved survival in ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Nevertheless, the actual risk for hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) still remains to be investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of ABO-incompatibility on HAT in adult LDLT patients.

Methods

Patients who received ABO-I LDLT were compared to those who received ABO-compatible (ABO-C) LDLT with a special focus on HAT.

Results

A total of 378 patients underwent LDLT from January 2012 to February 2018. Of those, ABO-I LDLT was performed in 78 consecutive patients. The other 300 patients with ABO-C LDLT constituted the comparator group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in baseline and perioperative characteristics. HAT occurred in 11 (2.9%) patients, 2 and 9 patients in ABO-I and ABO-C LDLT groups, respectively, which didn't show any significant difference between the two groups (P=0.84). All were categorized into early HAT. Immediate revascularization by intraarterial thrombolysis was successfully employed in 8 patients. Surgical revision of anastomosis and retransplantation were performed in 1 and 2 patients, respectively. No one-year mortality was related to HAT in the two groups. The overall outcomes including biliary complications made no significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusions

ABO-incompatibility has no adverse impact on the incidence and treatment outcome of HAT in the current rituximab-based desensitization.

International consensus statement on robotic hepatectomy surgery in 2018

The robotic surgical system has been applied in liver surgery. However, controversies concerns exist regarding a variety of factors including the safety, feasibility, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery. To promote the development of robotic hepatectomy, this study aimed to evaluate the current status of robotic hepatectomy and provide sixty experts’ consensus and recommendations to promote its development. Based on the World Health Organization Handbook for Guideline Development, a Consensus Steering Group and a Consensus Development Group were established to determine the topics, prepare evidence-based documents, and generate recommendations. The GRADE Grid method and Delphi vote were used to formulate the recommendations. A total of 22 topics were prepared analyzed and widely discussed during the 4 meetings. Based on the published articles and expert panel opinion, 7 recommendations were generated by the GRADE method using an evidence-based method, which focused on the safety, feasibility, indication, techniques and cost-effectiveness of hepatectomy. Given that the current evidences were low to very low as evaluated by the GRADE method, further randomized-controlled trials are needed in the future to validate these recommendations.

Impact of ABO-incompatibility on hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been reported to have acceptable outcomes in the era of rituximab-based prophylaxis. However, the outcomes of ABO-I LDLT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain to be elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the impact of ABO-Incompatibility on oncologic outcomes of LDLT for HCC.

METHODS

Patients with HCC who underwent ABO-I LDLT were randomly matched by 1:2 ratio to those who underwent ABO-compatible (ABO-C) LDLT according to propensity score. HCC recurrence and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.

RESULTS

Between January 2012 and December 2015, a total of 160 patients underwent LDLT for HCC confirmed by pathology analysis of liver explants. Thirty-nine consecutive patients underwent ABO-I LDLT for HCC, and 78 ABO-C LDLT patients were selected by propensity score matching, which made no significant difference between the two groups in baseline, perioperative, and tumor characteristics. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates in the ABO-I and ABO-C LDLT groups were 76.9%, 68.5%, 63.6% and 74.4%, 70.5%, 70.5%, respectively (p = 0.77). The site distribution of initial recurrence showed no significant difference between the two groups. The overall survival rates over the same period in the ABO-I and ABO-C LDLT groups were 82.1%, 73.5%, 73.5% and 92.2%, 80.3%, 80.3%, respectively (p = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

ABO-I LDLT, having no adverse impact on oncological outcomes, can be a feasible transplant option for HCC.

Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy

Laparoscopic liver resection has been applied to treat most indications for liver resection during the past two decades. According to the literature, patient numbers have increased exponentially as a result, and surgical difficulty has increased as well. In expert centers, laparoscopic anatomical hemihepatectomy and major liver resection more than 3 segments have become the acceptable treatment. Moreover, with surgical innovations and accumulated experience, living donor liver transplantation has become an established treatment choice for patients on the transplant waiting list. It is even considered an inevitable choice in regions with limited access to organs from deceased donors. However, significant morbidity and rare but catastrophic mortality are associated with donor hepatectomy and remain major concerns. Therefore, to decrease the incidence of complications, a minimally invasive approach in donor hepatectomy was adopted in the early 2000s. Initially, a minimally invasive approach was used for left lateral sectionectomy for pediatric liver transplant, then for laparoscopy-assisted hemihepatectomy and pure laparoscopic/robotic right donor hepatectomy, and more recently, for adult living donor liver transplantation. The extent of procedure complexity and potential complications depends on the approach and the size of the graft to be harvested. Early results from expert teams have seemed promising in terms of shortened donor recovery and improved perioperative outcomes. However, the combination of these two highly sophisticated surgical procedures raise more concerns about donor safety, especially with regard to unexpected events during the operation. A high level of evidence is very difficult to achieve in this highly specialized surgical practice with limited penetration. Therefore, an international registry has been suggested to determine the risks and benefits before the use of laparoscopic right donor hepatectomy spreads.

Impact of preserved collateral veins on small-for-size grafts in living donor liver transplantation

AIM

Graft size is a critical issue in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We hypothesized that too much portal flow could possibly be diverted into pre-existing collateral veins, alleviating small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) in LDLT. This study evaluated the impact of the preserved collateral veins in the outcomes of LDLT using a small-for-size graft.

METHODS

For patient safety, a graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) <0.8% was strictly confined to patients with collateral veins (group A), and the patient group was compared in a 1:3 ratio to a matched group of patients with GRWR ≥0.8% (group B) using propensity score analysis.

RESULTS

Forty and 120 patients were included in group A and B, respectively. No significant differences in baseline patient characteristics were observed between the two groups except for graft weight and GRWR. The lowest GRWR was 0.4%. The graft portal inflow showed no significant differences for 7 days after graft implantation, ranging from 1668 to 5100 mL/min. Small-for-size syndrome occurred in no patients (0.0%) in group A and in 10 (8.3%) in group B (P = 0.067). Overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were not different between the two groups (85.0%, 82.5%, and 82.5% vs. 92.5%, 86.7%, and 85.0%, respectively; P = 0.670).

CONCLUSION

Pre-existing collateral veins saved during surgery may have a reserve buffer for excessive portal flow to obviate SFSS in LDLT.

Small-for-size grafts increase recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplantation beyond milan criteria

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been reported to have high rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence compared with deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). This has been assumed to be due to the frequent use of small-for-size grafts (SFSGs) in LDLT rather than DDLT, but the relationship between graft size and prognosis remains controversial. This study aimed to clarify the effect of SFSGs on the oncologic outcomes of patients with HCC who underwent LDLT. Between January 2005 and December 2015, 597 consecutive patients underwent LDLT. Among these patients, those with HCC who underwent LDLT were randomly matched at a 1:3 ratio (graft-to-recipient body weight ratio [GRWR] < 0.8%:GRWR > 0.8%) according to propensity score. HCC recurrence and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. In addition, stratified subgroup analysis based on the Milan criteria was performed. SFSG was defined as a GRWR < 0.8%. Using propensity score matching, 82 patients with GRWR < 0.8% and 246 patients with GRWR ≥ 0.8% were selected. For patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference of HCC recurrence (P = 0.82) and patient survival (P = 0.95) was found based on GRWR. However, for patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 52.4%, 49.3%, and 49.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR < 0.8%, and 76.5%, 68.3%, and 64.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR ≥ 0.8% (P = 0.049). The former group exhibited poor patient survival rates (P = 0.047). In conclusion, for patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference in oncologic outcomes was found based on liver graft size. However, among the patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, SFSG recipients showed poor oncologic outcomes. Because extended criteria are frequently used in LDLT for HCC, a recipient's prognosis can be improved if a liver graft of appropriate size is carefully selected during donor selection. Liver Transplantation 24 35-43 2018 AASLD.

Middle Hepatic Vein Bleed During Donor Hepatectomy: Technique for Safe Practice

Safe performance of donor hepatectomy is crucial for sustainability of a living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) program. Middle hepatic vein (MHV) is always encountered during parenchymal transection irrespective of right or left donor hepatectomies. Here we present a safe and effective technique for tackling MHV bleed during LDLT from a single centre experience.

Ligation and cut as a method for bile duct division in living donor right hepatectomy

The importance of bile duct division cannot be overemphasized in living donor surgery. Ligation and cut (LC) as a method for bile duct division in living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) has never been reported. The purpose of this study was to introduce the LC method of bile duct division in LDRH. All LDRH donors were identified through a prospectively maintained database at the authors' institution between September 2009 and March 2013, and the 2 methods, LC and cut and oversewing (CO), were compared both in terms of donor and recipient outcomes of right lobe living donor liver transplantation. In the LC method, after complete parenchymal transection, the right hepatic duct was dissected in the Glisson's sheath and ligated just at the right side of the confluence, and then the right side of the ligature was cut. The LC and CO methods were performed in 109 and 134 donors, respectively. Bile duct division time (P < 0.001) and operative time (P < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the LC group than in the CO group. With a median follow-up of 60.2 months, biliary complication rate was lower in the LC group than in the CO group (0% versus 5.2%; P = 0.01), but with no significant difference between the recipient groups. All donors made a complete recovery. In conclusion, the bile ducts of living donors can be dissected safely from the Glisson's sheath, and the LC method facilitates bile duct division and has a lower incidence of biliary complication in LDRH without compromising the recipient outcomes. Liver Transplantation 23 448-456 2017 AASLD.

Right hepatectomy in living donors with previous abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the impact of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) on living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH). The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of liver transplantation using right lobe grafts of living donors with PAS.

METHODS

Data were reviewed from LDRH patients at the authors' institution between March 2008 and November 2014. LDRH patients with PAS were divided into two groups according to upper PAS (group 1) or lower PAS (group 2), and they were compared to those without PAS (group 3) who were matched 1:1 based on age, gender, and body mass index. Perioperative data, complications by the Clavien classification, and the outcomes with more than 14 months follow-up were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-three (4.9%) of a total of 471 LDRH donors had PAS. Eleven donors were assigned to group 1, 12 to group 2, and 23 to group 3. Intraperitoneal adhesions were found in 20 (87.0%) of 23 donors with PAS, of whom 5 (21.7%) had adhesiolysis-related injuries that happened more commonly in group 1 than in group 2 (P=0.025). LDRH was successfully completed under upper midline laparotomy in all donors. No donors received perioperative blood transfusion. The peak postoperative AST, ALT, INR, and total bilirubin levels made no difference between the three groups. Compared with group 3, groups 1 and 2 had a longer operative time (P=0.012) and a higher grade I complication rate (P=0.047). All donors recovered fully to their routine activities. The 23 recipients of grafts from donors with PAS showed good liver function with 1-year graft and patient survivals of 100%.

CONCLUSION

A history of PAS is not a contraindication to LDRH in the current era of advanced surgical techniques.

Report of the 22nd Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society

The 2016 Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society was held in Seoul, South Korea in May. The 22nd Congress marked the largest multidisciplinary liver transplantation meeting in Asia since 2010. The principal themes were living donation, allocation, immunosuppression, machine preservation, novel treatment of hepatitis C, and expansion of the deceased-donor allograft pool. This report presents select abstracts from the scientific sessions within the context of the published literature to serve as a quick reference.

Impact of Intra-Abdominal Adhesion on Living Donor Right Hepatectomy

The impact of intra-abdominal adhesion (IAA) on living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) remains to be clarified. The purpose of this study was to compare both the donor and recipient outcomes of right lobe living donor liver transplantation according to IAA detected intraoperatively. LDRH donors were identified through a prospectively maintained database at the authors' institution between March 2008 and February 2014. IAA was graded according to Beck et al (Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 1749-1753). LDRH donors with IAA (group A) were matched 1:3 to those without IAA (group B) based on age, gender, and BMI. Perioperative data, complications by the Clavien classification, and the outcomes with at least 12 months follow-up were compared. Thirty-two (7.6%) of a total of 420 LDRH donors had IAA around the liver. Nineteen donors had previous abdominal surgery. LDRH was successfully completed under upper midline laparotomy in all donors. Compared with group B, group A had a longer operative time (270 vs. 172 min; p < 0.001), a higher wound complication rate (28.1% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.009), and a longer postoperative stay (10 vs. 7 days; p = 0.009). All donors recovered completely to their previous activities. The 1-year graft and recipient survivals of recipients were comparable between two groups. These findings support the feasibility and safety of LDRH in patients with IAA.

The Impact of a Surgical Protocol for Enhanced Recovery on Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Single-Center Cohort Study

The concept of surgery for enhanced recovery (SFER) program has never been an issue in the context of living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH), much less its effects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes after the establishment of an SFER protocol for LDRH in a single center.A single-center cohort study was performed in 500 consecutive living donors who underwent right hepatectomy from January 2005 to June 2014 by analyzing the outcomes before and after an established SFER protocol that evolved with continuous refinements in surgical technique and management over 300 LDRHs, being in place on September 2011. Donor characteristics, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications divided into 2 groups (group 1, stepwise adjustment; group 2, complete adherence to the protocol) were compared.Donor characteristics were comparable in the 2 groups. Overall complication rate was 10.0% with no mortality. In group 2, operative time, hospital stay, and overall complication rate decreased significantly, and the morbidity was 1% and confined in grade I complication without reoperation, perioperative blood transfusion, or readmission. All donors in this series recovered fully and returned to the previous functional lifestyle.An SFER protocol on LDRH can be established by the gradual implementation of various refinements of surgical technique, and the recent outcomes achieved after the establishment of an SFER protocol could provide a current guidance on LDRH toward the ultimate goal of zero morbidity.

Meeting report of the 2014 joint international congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society, Liver Intensive Care Group of Europe, and European Liver and Intestinal Association

The 2014 Annual Meeting of the International Liver Transplantation Society was held in London, England. This was the 20th meeting of the Society and was marked by a joint meeting including the European Liver and Intestinal Association as well as the Liver Intensive Care Group of Europe. The meeting included symposia, invited lectures, debates, oral presentations, and posters. The principal themes were living donation, expanding the deceased donor pool, machine preservation, and new oral therapies for hepatitis C virus. This report highlights the scientific discussions of this meeting.

Liver Transplantation for Patients with Cholestatic Liver Diseases

Background

Cholestatic liver diseases (CD) account for 11% of all liver transplantations (LT) in the Eurotransplant region. Despite the excellent long-term outcome that is considerably superior to all other indications for LT, transplant surgeons and physicians face nowadays – in the era of MELD (Model of End-Stage Liver Disease)-based allocation, organ shortage, and extended allocation policies – more and more challenges in this patient cohort, especially since there is no curative medical treatment for these entities.

Methods

Based on a literature review and personal experience in liver transplantation for CD, we show the status quo of indication, allocation, and outcome as well as potential strategies to overcome long waiting times and organ shortage.

Results

Concerning graft and patient survival, CD remain the ‘best indications’ for LT. Since the implementation of MELD-based allocation results in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) could be preserved on good levels only by the implementation and revision of standard exceptions. Recurrence of PSC after LT remains a challenge for transplant surgeons and physicians. New data has kindled a debate on biliary reconstruction in LT for PSC. Promising data on living donor LT motivate to push the boundaries in this direction.

Conclusion

CD are excellent indications for liver transplantation since excellent long-term outcomes are achievable when the transplant is performed at the right time. The decisions concerning evaluation, listing, and allocation should be made by an interdisciplinary team of gastroenterologists and transplant surgeons.