Long-term quality of life after liver donation in the adult to adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study (A2ALL)

Living donor liver transplant for Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis: considerations and global perspectives

INTRODUCTION

In carefully selected individuals, outcomes of early deceased donor liver transplantation (<6 months of sobriety) for severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (AAH) are similar to transplant for other indications. There is increasing interest in the expansion of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) for AAH.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was conducted in PubMed using search terms 'alcoholic hepatitis,' 'alcohol-associated hepatitis,' 'acute liver failure' and 'living donor liver transplant' between 1995 and 2025. Additional data sources were the International Registry in Organ Donation and Transplantation, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. We summarize the global burden of alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), and the emergence of early LT for AAH. Donor- and recipient-specific factors are explored, as well as societal considerations including equitable allocation and health system financial impact. Finally, current LT practices for ALD by region are reviewed, with a focus on readiness for expansion of LDLT for AAH.

EXPERT OPINION

Use of LDLT for AAH is infrequent, but countries with experience in LT for AAH and/or LDLT for acute liver failure are most poised to expand to LDLT for AAH. Progress is needed in assessing risk of return to harmful drinking and improving management of alcohol use disorder.

Examining the Relationship Between Healthy Life Awareness and Psychological Well-Being in Liver Transplantation Patients: A Structural Equation Model

This study aimed to evaluate the mediating role of healthy life awareness in the relationship between the sociodemographic characteristics and psychological well-being of liver transplant patients. The sample of the study consisted of 202 patients aged between 18 and 69 years who underwent liver transplantation surgery at a hospital in Turkey. The data were collected using a sociodemographic information form, the "Healthy Life Awareness Scale" and the "Psychological Well-Being Scale." Healthy life awareness directly predicted psychological well-being (β: 0.68, p < 0.01). Education positively predicted psychological well-being both directly (β: 0.14, p < 0.05) and indirectly through healthy life awareness (β: 0.76, p < 0.05). Age indirectly predicted healthy life awareness and psychological well-being through employment status and education. The income level positively predicted healthy life awareness (β: 0.14, p < 0.05), whereas gender (male) negatively predicted healthy life awareness (β: -0.22, p < 0.01). Healthy life awareness was a significant predictor of psychological well-being. The results of this study may offer valuable information for healthcare providers to tailor interventions that also support mental and emotional health, which is critical to the long-term success of transplant outcomes.

Steatosis, inflammation, fibroprogression, and cirrhosis in remnant liver post-liver donation

Background and Aim

This is a cross-sectional observational study conducted on living liver donors focusing on "long-term remnant liver health" specifically looking at steatosis, inflammation, and fibrosis using multiparametric ultra sonological evaluation and noninvasive blood tests.

Methods

Multiparametric ultrasound evaluation included assessment of shear wave elastography (fibrosis), sound speed plane wave ultrasound, attenuation plane wave ultrasound (steatosis), and viscosity plane wave ultrasound (inflammation). Blood test based APRI and FIB-4 were calculated. Liver biopsy was performed if noninvasive evaluation pointed toward clinically relevant fibro progression (F4).

Results

Out of 36 donors, significant fibrosis (>F2) was found in 11 donors (30.5%), seven donors (19.4%) had severe fibrosis (>F3), and two donors had shear wave elastography values suggestive of cirrhosis(F4). Of these two, one donor was extensively evaluated and was found to have biopsy proven cirrhosis with endoscopic evidence of portal hypertension. The prevalence of fatty liver disease in our study group was 50%.

Conclusion

We report the first liver donor cohort with fibroprogression and cirrhosis occurring in the remnant liver. Our donor cohort with a significant proportion having steatosis and fibroprogression underscores the importance of regular follow-up of liver donors and evaluation of remnant liver.

Long-term medical and quality of life outcomes among voluntary liver donors

BACKGROUND

Long-term medical and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in voluntary liver donors remain under investigated. The objective of the current study was to report long-term medical outcomes and re-evaluate QOL in living liver donors.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of donors who underwent donor hepatectomy between 2012 and 2018. We investigated long-term outcomes in 7 domains. These include medical problems, surgical procedures, work-related issues, pregnancy outcomes, psychiatric interventions, willingness to donate again, and long-term mortality. QOL was evaluated using short-form 36.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 61.4 months (53.3-83.7). Among 698 donors, 80 (11.5%) experienced medical problems, 4 (0.6%) had work-related issues, and 20 (2.9%) needed psychiatric assistance. Surgery was performed in 49 donors (7%), and females were more likely to have undergone incisional hernia repair (5.8% vs 1.9%, P = .006). There were 79 postdonation pregnancies including 41 normal vaginal deliveries (51.9%), 35 cesarean sections (44.3%), and 3 miscarriages (3.8%). Willingness to donate again was reported by 658 donors (94.3%). Donors whose recipients were alive were more likely to donate again (95.5% vs 90.5%, P = .01). There were 3 deaths (0.4%) in the long-term. The mean physical composite score at initial and follow-up evaluation was 86.7 ± 13.9 and 76.5 ± 20.9 (P = .001), and the mean mental composite score at initial and follow-up evaluation was 92.1 ± 13.5 and 80.7 ± 16 (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The overall long-term outlook in living liver donors is promising. QOL parameters might deteriorate over time and frequent re-evaluation might be considered.

The psychology, legality, ethics and medical aspects of organ donation by minors

Any individual who has not attained the chronological age of legal majority as per national law is termed a minor. The concept of living donation (LD) has always been a subject of ethical debate and further compounding the controversy is the question of LD by minors. The decision for a minor to donate poses a special challenge as it involves a close family unit of parent-child relationship. Such an emotionally loaded situation wherein questions of attachment, perceived duties, moral obligation are likely to cloud a truly informed consent on the part of the minor to donation, who may find themselves in a vulnerable position. Furthermore, a minor's cognitive ability to comprehend the gravity of LD and when required defy parental coercion need to be elucidates before a minor is accepted for LD. Experts have set out stringent conditions which need to be met prior to the exceptional circumstance that a minor is considered for organ donation. Such donations should require parental permission, child's assent and the involvement of a paediatric-trained donor advocacy team. This article debates the question of minors acting as live donors from ethical, medical, psychosocial and legal viewpoints with an aim to present internationally defined circumstances when a minor may morally participate as a LD, thereby laying the foundation for future deliberations in this regard using traditional metrics to juxtapose divergent courses of action.

Autoimmune Hepatitis on a Living Liver Donor: An Unexpected Long-Term Complication

In Western countries, deceased donor liver transplantation remains the standard of care for patients with end-stage liver disease. Living donor liver transplantation is a viable and feasible strategy for patients with end-stage liver disease designed to mitigate the deceased organ shortage. Donor safety is the primary concern because liver donors, ideally, should not have any complication. We report a case of middle-aged woman without a history of chronic liver disease who developed autoimmune hepatitis more than 20 years after live liver donation. Changes in these patients' liver enzymes should prompt swift referral to an hepatologist for initial liver disease work-up.

A systematic review of the factors significantly influencing the quality of life of living liver donors

Objectives

This systematic review aimed to synthesize the literature on factors influencing the quality of life in living liver donors post-donation and to provide a reference for developing targeted interventions in clinical practice.

Methods

A systematic search guided by the PRISMA 2020 approach was performed on specific databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINHAL with full text, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses databases. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from inception to October 2022 covering cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies on factors affecting the quality of life of living liver donors after donation were included in this systematic review. The methodological quality of the studies was examined using a modified version of the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool.

Results

A total of 6,576 studies were retrieved, and 16 eligible studies were finally included. Four types of independent influencing factors: sociodemographic (gender, donor age, education, ethnicity, and marital status), donation-related (length of hospital stay and number of hospitalizations/hospital visits related to donation surgery, recipient outcome, time from donation, complications, donation decision, ambivalence about donating, donor-recipient relationship), health-related (body mass index and pre-donation physical symptoms), and psychosocial (pre-donation physical and mental score, household income, anxiety, depression), were extracted from the included studies. Several studies consistently identified old age, recipient death, recent donation, postoperative complications experienced by donors, and donor concerns about their well-being as negative influencing factors on physical function. Female donors, low education levels, longer hospital stays, and/or more hospital visits due to donation, poor recipient outcome, recent donation, pre-donation concerns regarding their well-being, and first-degree relative and spouse/partner donors were reported in several studies as negative predictors for psychological status. Factors affecting social function were considered by only two included articles.

Conclusions

The quality of life of living liver donors could be affected by both donation surgery and psychosocial factors. Based on the above-influencing factors, clinical nurses can develop targeted interventions to improve the quality of life of living liver donors.

Health-related quality of life of pediatric living donor liver transplantation donors who undergone donation surgery for 10 years†

Objective: To investigate the quality of life (QOL) of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) donors.

Methods: The EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) was used to measure the QOL of donors.

Results: One donor reported “a little problem” of mobility (MO), and 2 donors (9.1%) reported “a little problem” of usual activities (UA). Moreover, there were 8 donors (36.4%) and 7 donors (31.8%) declaring “a little problem” of pain/discomfort (PD) and anxiety/depression (AD), respectively. And both dimensions have a donor reporting “moderate problem.” The mean visual analog scale (VAS) was 83.1 ± 12.4.

Conclusions: Donors can gain a stable and preferable QOL after donation in both the short and long terms. ED-5D application in the field of liver transplant could be an effective choice in QOL studies.

Living Liver Donation Does not Significantly Affect Long-Term Life, Disability, or Medical Insurability

INTRODUCTION

The growing practice of living liver donation requires comprehensive understanding of the financial implications for living liver donors. While obtaining and maintaining insurance is important to financial health, little is known about the impact of liver donation on future insurability.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the donors' experiences with insurance following donation and identify the insurance provider-driven factors that contribute to donor insurability.

DESIGN

A two center cohort of living donors with donation between January 2000 and December 2018 (N = 442) were surveyed about postdonation insurance experiences. To understand insurance provider practices towards liver donors, life (n = 11) and disability (n = 4) insurance underwriters were asked to provide policy quotes for a standardized living liver donor profile.

RESULTS

Responses (N = 101) were received by August 2020 (response rate = 22.9%). Living liver donors reported owning life (58%), disability (35%), and medical (87%) insurance at rates comparable to the general population with low proportions reporting difficulty obtaining these insurance types (9%, 9%, 4%, respectively). Post-donation life insurance ownership was associated with post-donation employment (P = 0.01). Underwriter responses indicate life and disability insurability were adversely affected up to 12 months following donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Living liver donors did not have difficulty maintaining insurance in the long-term but should be counseled to purchase insurance prior to surgery as short-term insurability may be affected. Perception of difficulty obtaining insurance following donation remains of significant concern among living donors. Further collaboration between the transplant community and insurance companies is warranted.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Supplementary Information

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

Influence of surgical technique in donor hepatectomy on immediate and short-term living donor outcomes - A systematic review of the literature, meta-analysis, and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

There are currently no guidelines pertaining to ERAS pathways in living donor hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify whether surgical technique influences immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation surgery.

DATA SOURCES

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

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021260707). Endpoints were mortality, overall complications, serious complications, bile eaks, pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and length of stay.

RESULTS

Of the 2410 screened articles, 21 articles were included for final analysis; three observational, 13 retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort studies, and one randomized trial. Overall complications were higher with right versus left hepatectomy (26.8% vs. 20.8%; OR 1.4, P = .010). Donors after left hepatectomy had shorter length of stay (MD 1.4 days) compared to right hepatectomy. There was no difference in outcomes after right donor hepatectomy with versus without middle hepatic vein. We had limited data on the influence of incision type and minimally invasive approaches on living donor outcomes, and no data on the effect of operative time on donor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Left donor hepatectomy should be preferred over right hepatectomy, as it is related to improved donor short-term outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Right donor hepatectomy with or without MHV has equivalent outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong); no preference is recommended, decision should be based on program's experience and expertise. No difference in outcomes was observed related to incision type, minimally invasive vs. open (QOE; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak); no preference can be recommended.

Long-term follow-up of living liver donors: A single-center experience

Living donors are healthy individuals who are exposed to a major surgical procedure during which a major part of their liver is resected. Data on the long-term consequences of living liver donation are scarce. This study examined clinical, laboratory, and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in 237 living liver donors and 239 matched controls during 48-168 months of postdonation follow-up. We used the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), version 1. The scores for the four following subscales were higher in nondonors than in donors: physical functioning (p = 0.009), role limitations due to physical health (p = 0.002), energy/fatigue (p < 0.001), and bodily pain (p < 0.001). The scores on the eight subscales of the SF-36 were higher in donors with living recipients than in donors whose recipients died (p < 0.001). Our results suggest that living donor right hepatectomy is safe and results in a postdonation HRQoL similar to that of nondonors in those donors whose recipients are healthy, whereas donors whose recipients die have a lower HRQoL that is significantly negatively correlated with the time since recipient death and improves over time.

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.

CANLI KARACİĞER DONÖRLERİNDE YAŞAM KALİTESİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Objective: In this study, it was aimed to examine the effect of transplantation on physical, mental and psychosocial health of donors by evaluating the quality of life of living liver donors after transplantation. Methods: The study was conducted with three groups at XXXX University Faculty of Medicine Organ Transplantation and Research Center. 43 living donors from 2017 and 43 living donors from 2007-2016 who underwent liver transplantation were randomly selected to participate in the study. Also 43 control subjects were selected randomly from the community. The study was conducted by a single interviewer between 01.02.2018 and 31.05.2018 by telephone or e-mail. The socio-demographic data questionnaire, Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Hospital Anxiety-Depression Scale (HADS) prepared by the researchers were applied to all participants. Results: The mean age of the participants was 38.04 ± 9.84 years, and of these participants 48.1% (n= 62) of them were female. When donors and control group were evaluated in terms of their quality of life, no significant difference was found between physical role, energy(vitality) and mental health subgroups(p> 0.05). However, donors have a better quality of life in physical functioning, emotional aspect, social functioning, pain and general health subgroups. It was detected that the quality of life was not affected by age, gender, marital status, educational status, economic status, job loss, comorbidity or disturbance by presence of operational scar. Only sexual problems and the loss of the recipient’s life were observed to have a negative impact on the quality of life. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of anxiety and depression (p

Factors affecting anxiety, depression, and self-care ability in patients who have undergone liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Depression, anxiety, and altered self-care ability are among the most important factors affecting the quality of life of liver transplant recipients. Depending on the severity of the underlying liver disease, signs and symptoms of anxiety and depression may become more pronounced.

AIM

To evaluate the factors affecting depression, anxiety and self-care abilities of liver transplant recipients.

METHODS

Recipients who are ≥ 18 years and who underwent liver transplantation at Inonu University Liver Transplantation Institute were included in this descriptive and cross-sectional study. Sample size analysis showed that the minimum number of recipients should be 301 (confidence level = 95%, confidence interval = 2.5, population = 1382). Three hundred and twenty recipients were interviewed and 316 recipients that have answered the questionnaires accurately were analyzed. The dependent variables were the Beck Depression Scale, State-Trait Anxiety Scale (Form I and II), and Self-Care Agency Scale. The independent variables of the study were sociodemographic characteristics, biliary complications, hepatocellular carcinoma, recommending liver transplantation to other patients, and the interval of out-patient clinic visits.

RESULTS

Self-care ability scores were lower (P = 0.002) and anxiety scores were higher (P = 0.004) in recipients with biliary complications. On the other hand, in recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma, self-care scores were lower (P = 0.006) while depression (P = 0.003) and anxiety scores (P = 0.009) were higher. Liver transplantation recipients with a monthly income < 3000 Turkish liras had higher depression (P < 0.001) and anxiety (P = 0.003) scores. The recipients who stated that they would not recommend liver transplantation to others had lower self-care scores (P = 0.002), higher depression (P < 0.001), higher state anxiety (P = 0.02), and trait anxiety (P < 0.001) scores.

CONCLUSION

Presence of biliary complications and hepatocellular carcinoma, low income level, and an obligation for monthly visits to the outpatient clinic are factors that are found to affect self-care capability, depression, and anxiety.

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

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

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

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

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

Pregnancy Outcomes After Living Liver Donation: A Multi-Institutional Study

Nearly half of living liver donors in North America are women of child-bearing age. Fetal and maternal outcomes after donation are unknown. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of female living liver donors (aged 18-50 years at donation) from 6 transplant centers. Participants were surveyed about their pregnancies and fertility. Outcomes were compared between predonation and postdonation pregnancies. Generalized estimating equations were clustered on donor and adjusted for age at pregnancy, parity, and pregnancy year. Among the 276 donors surveyed, 151 donors responded (54.7% response rate) and reported 313 pregnancies; 168/199 (68.8%) of the predonation pregnancies and 82/114 (71.9%) of the postdonation pregnancies resulted in live births, whereas 16.6% and 24.6% resulted in miscarriage, respectively. Women with postdonation pregnancies were older (32.0 versus 26.7 years; P < 0.001) and more frequently reported abnormal liver enzymes during pregnancy (3.5% versus 0.0%; P = 0.02) and delivery via cesarean delivery (35.4% versus 19.7%; P = 0.01). On adjusted analysis, there was no difference in cesarean delivery (odds ratio [OR], 2.44; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.98-6.08), miscarriage (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.78-3.24), combined endpoints of pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.36-4.49), or intrauterine growth restriction and preterm birth (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.19-4.3). Of the 49 women who attempted pregnancy after donation, 11 (22.5%) self-reported infertility; however, 8/11 (72.7%) eventually had live births. Aside from increased reporting of abnormal liver enzymes and cesarean deliveries, there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcomes before and after living liver donation. One-fifth of women who attempt pregnancy after liver donation reported infertility, and although the majority went on to successful live births, further exploration is needed to understand the contributing factors. Future research should continue to monitor this patient-centered outcome across a large cohort of donors.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Mental Health and Well-Being of Solid Organ Transplant Donors. The Forgotten Sacrifices

In light of a global organ shortage, living donor transplantation has become increasingly relevant as an alternative to deceased donor transplantation. While current research has revolved around the medical aspects of transplantation, there remains a paucity of literature regarding the quality of life (QOL) of living donors. Hence, this review aims to provide a comprehensive outline of the current landscape of living liver and kidney transplantation, with a focus on the mental health and wellbeing of donors. As highlighted in previous studies, organ donation has a significant impact on both physical and mental aspects of donor wellbeing, with marked deteriorations occurring in the short term. Furthermore, other qualitative aspects such as financial burden contribute greatly to donor distress, reflecting a need for improved donor care. To address these pertinent issues, recommendations for a successful transplant program are detailed in this review, which encompasses psychological and social aspects of donor care throughout the donation process. Further research can be done on the impact of recipient deaths on donor QOL and appropriate interventions. Overall, given the selfless sacrifices of living donors, the care of their mental wellbeing is essential. Therefore, greater emphasis should be placed on the provision of adequate psychosocial support for them.

[Young Adult Donor's Experiences of Living Donor Liver Transplantation]

PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore young adult donors' experiences of living donor liver transplantation.

METHODS

A phenomenological research method was used. The participants were two women and six men. Data were collected through individual in-depth interviews from November 25th, 2019 to June 10th, 2020 and analyzed using Colaizzi's phenomenological method.

RESULTS

Five theme clusters extracted from the young adult donors' experiences were painful decision of a liver donation, the agony of both mind and body that overpowers youth, the bitter and bare face of reality that a young donor encounters, feeling the power of love that fills up the space of the organ removed, and liver donation becoming priming water for maturity.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study provide a deeper understanding of the lives of young adult donors who have experienced unexpected difficulties as well as self growth from the donation. It is expected that the results can be of use for developing and applying customized nursing interventions for management before and after liver donation among young adult donors.

Health-related quality of life after anonymous nondirected living liver donation: A multicenter collaboration

Literature on living nondirected liver donation is sparse. The purpose of this study was to assess health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in anonymous nondirected living liver donors (ND-LLDs). ND-LLDs at 3 centers: University of Alberta (n = 12), University of Colorado (n = 12), and University of Southern California (n = 12), were surveyed. Thirty donors (83%) responded to the Donor Quality of Life (USC DQLS) and Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Most respondents (n = 15, 50%) donated their left lateral segment, 27% right lobe, and 23% left lobe. The majority were female (67%) and mean age was 38.9 ± 11.2 years at donation. Median follow-up was 1.1 (interquartile range 0.4-3.3) years. Approximately 37% had previously donated a kidney. Eleven experienced ≥1 postoperative complication, with only 1 Clavien-Dindo IIIb. Most reported minimal impact on school or work performance, all felt positive or neutral about their overall health since donation, and none expressed postdonation regrets. No donor reported impacts on health insurability, and 3 of 4 respondents attempting to purchase life insurance postdonation were successful. ND-LLD SF-36 outcomes were similar to US population norms. Overall, ND-LLDs demonstrated acceptable HR-QOL after donation and are appropriate candidates for partial liver donation. Based on evaluation of donation impact, consideration should be given to postdonation support strategies.

Estimating the effect of increasing utilization of living donor liver transplantation using observational data

There has been a recent increase in enthusiasm for expansion of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) programmes. Using all adults initially placed on the waiting list in the United States, we estimated the risk of overall mortality under national strategies which differed in their utilization of LDLT. We used a generalization of inverse probability weighting which can estimate the effect of interventions in the setting of finite resources. From 2005 to 2015, 93 812 eligible individuals were added to the waitlist: 51 322 received deceased donor grafts while 1970 underwent LDLT. Individuals who underwent LDLT had more favourable prognostic factors, including lower mean MELD score at transplant (14.6 vs. 20.5). The 1-year, 5-year and 10-year cumulative incidence of death under the current level of LDLT utilization were 18.0% (95% CI: 17.8, 18.3%), 41.2% (95% CI: 40.8, 41.5%) and 57.4% (95% CI: 56.9, 57.9%) compared to 17.9% (95% CI: 17.7, 18.2%), 40.6% (95% CI: 40.2, 40.9%) and 56.4% (95% CI: 55.8, 56.9%) under a strategy which doubles LDLT utilization. Expansion of LDLT utilization would have a measurable, modest effect on the risk of mortality for the entire cohort of individuals who begin on the transplant waiting list.

A Long-Term Prospective Study of Quality of Life, Abdominal Symptoms, and Cosmesis of Donors After Hepatectomy for Live-Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive assessment of quality of life of live liver donors is required for adequate donor outcome reporting, but there is a lack of prospective data. Assessment of all aspects of liver donation over a long period is a necessity to have complete understanding of the donation process.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data of liver donors operated between March 2012 to August 2013, examined donors (n = 52) from predonation to five years after the donation. Participants were administered 'World Health Organization quality of life Brief and questionnaires' regarding their attitude predonation, their overall well-being in terms of abdominal symptoms, cosmesis, and satisfaction with donation and consent process at predefined time points till five years after donation. The weight of the donors was recorded at predefined time points.

RESULTS

The donors whose recipients died were less likely to continue with the study (8.9% vs. 71.4%; P < 0.001). After surgery, physical domain took 2 years to reach to predonation level while psychological and social relationship domains took 3 months and 1 month, respectively; environmental domain remained stable throughout. Even after recovery and discharge from hospital, donors experienced abdominal symptoms for a long period of time, but as the time increased from donation the reporting of symptoms decreased. Body image scores (12 ± 2.46 at 3 months vs. 14.9 ± 3.16 at five years, P < 0.001) and cosmesis scores (14.6 ± 3.67 at 3 months vs. 18.75 ± 3 at five years, P < 0.001) significantly improved over time. There was significant weight gain in donors (65.2 ± 6.1 kg predonation vs. 70.69 ± 2.4 kg at 2 years P < 0.001). Donors understood the consent process well, but did not use it for decision making. Overall, they showed a high level of satisfaction in the donation process.

CONCLUSION

Donors have good quality of life and show steady recovery in all aspects. Recipient death affects attitude towards donation process.

Psychosocial Outcomes of Donors Whose Recipients Died After Living Donor Liver Transplantation

PURPOSE

Our aim was to investigate the psychosocial outcomes of the donors whose recipients died after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

Forty-one donors whose recipients died and 87 donors whose recipients were alive after LDLT at Inonu University Liver Transplantation Institute between 2012 and 2017 were included into the study. Demographic data form, Beck anxiety scale, Beck depression scale, Beck Hopelessness Scale, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, Decision Regret Scale, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and general evaluation questionnaire (24 questions) were used in all donors by face to face questioning. In addition to the descriptive statistical analysis, chi-square and student's t tests were used to evaluate the differences between the groups.

RESULTS

Recipient death after living donor liver transplantation is a factor that negatively increases the level of anxiety, depression, hopelessness levels, and repentance of donors, and adversely affects the psychological growth of the donors after donation experience.

CONCLUSION

Regular follow-up of the donors should be done psychosocially in the postoperative period, especially the donors whose recipients have died should be followed up more frequently, and their support and treatment should be provided when needed. The donors should also be informed about the psychosocial implications of operative management and postoperative period. More studies are needed regarding the psychosocial problems of the donors.

Long-Term Financial, Psychosocial, and Overall Health-Related Quality of Life After Living Liver Donation

BACKGROUND

To assess the impact of living liver donation (LD) in a diverse and aging population up to 20 y after donation, particularly with regard to medical, financial, psychosocial, and overall health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

METHODS

Patients undergoing LD between 1999 and 2009 were recruited to respond to the Short-Form 36 and a novel Donor Quality of Life Survey at two time points (2010 and 2018).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight living liver donors (LLDs) completed validated surveys, with a mean follow-up of 11.5 ± 5.1 y. Per Donor Quality of Life Survey data, physical activity or strength was not impacted by LD in most patients. All respondents returned to school or employment, and 82.4% reported that LD had no impact on school or work performance. LD did not impact health insurability in 95.6% of donors, and only one patient experienced difficulty obtaining life insurance. Overall, 97.1% of respondents did not regret LD. Short-Form 36 survey-measured outcomes were similar between LLDs and the general U.S.

POPULATION

LLDs who responded in both 2010 and 2018 were followed for an overall average of 15.4 ± 2.4 y and HRQOL outcomes in these donors also remained statistically equivalent to U.S. population norms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the longest postdonation follow-up and offers unique insight related to HRQOL in a highly diverse patient population. Although LLDs continue to maintain excellent HRQOL outcomes up to 20 y after donation, continued lifetime follow-up is required to accurately provide young, healthy potential donors with an accurate description of the risks that they may incur on aging.

Changes in the quality of life of living liver donors: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Comprehending the physical, psychological, social benefits, and harm associated with liver donation is critical in promoting practices to maintain donors' long-term health. However, changes in quality of life among living liver donors pre- and post-donation have not been established.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis of prospective longitudinal studies examined the quality of life changes among living liver donors pre- and post-donation.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, CINHAL with full text, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses were mainly searched for full-text articles from inception till December 2018 to identify studies assessing the quality of life of living liver donors. The methodological quality of the included studies was examined. The quality of life post-donation at five assessment points, ≤1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and ≥ 24 months were compared with the pre-donation, respectively.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2215 records, and a total of 15 articles (13 studies) with 715 donors were included in this meta-analysis. Physical functioning scores at ≤1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and ≥24 months post-donation were significantly lower than pre-donation [overall standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.67, 95% CI: -0.86, -0.49; p ≤]. Significantly higher level of pain was found at 3-month post-donation (SMD, -1.05; 95% CI: -1.26, -0.85; p < 0.00001). Also, a significantly higher level of anxiety was found at 3-month post-donation (SMD, -0.29; 95%CI: -0.51, -0.07; p = 0.01), but there were no significant changes in general psychological state and depression. A significant reduction in donors' social quality of life (SMD, -2.61; 95%CI: -4.75, 0.48; p = 0.02) was found at ≤1-month post-donation, and recovery to pre-donation levels occurred at 3 months post-donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Living liver donation was associated with a decline in physical functioning, which was sustained for longer than 2 years post-donation. Impaired social and psychological quality of life affected donors for 1-3 months after their donation. The quality of life of living liver donors has become a pressing issue requiring more attention from doctors and nurses within the transplant team. However, multicenter, prospective, and longitudinal studies are needed to confirm the long-term safety of living liver donors.

Global experience and perspective on anonymous nondirected live donation in living donor liver transplantation

Anonymous nondirected living liver donation (ANLLD), sometimes referred to as "altruistic" donation, occurs when a biologically unrelated person comes forward to donate a portion of his/her liver to a transplant candidate who is unknown to the donor. Here, we explore the current status of ANLLD with special consideration of published reports; US experience; impact on donor psychosocial outcomes; barriers to donation; and current global trends with respect to ethical considerations. Between 1998 and 2019, 105 anonymous nondirected living liver donor (ND-LLD) transplants have been documented in the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Sixteen donors (15%) were reported to experience a postoperative complication. Currently, 89 donors remain alive (85%), 16 (15%) have unknown status, and none are confirmed deceased. Although there are only a handful of case series, these data suggest that ANLLD is a feasible option. While there are no liver-specific data, studies involving anonymous nondirected kidney donors suggest that anonymous donation does not adversely impact psychosocial outcomes in donors or recipients. There are substantial financial burdens and ethical considerations related to ANLLD. Further studies are required to assess donor demographics, psychosocial motivations, long-term health-related quality of life, and financial impact of ANLLD.

Modeling the hepatic arterial flow in living liver donor after left hepatectomy and postoperative boundary condition exploration

Preoperative and postoperative hepatic perfusion is modeled with one-dimensional (1-D) Navier-Stokes equations. Flow rates obtained from ultrasound (US) data and impedance resulted from structured trees are the inflow and outflow boundary condition (BC), respectively. Structured trees terminate at the size of the arterioles, which can enlarge their size after hepatectomy. In clinical studies, the resistance to pulsatile arterial flow caused by the microvascular bed can be reflected by the resistive index (RI), a frequently used index in assessing arterial resistance. This study uses the RI in a novel manner to conveniently obtain the postoperative outflow impedance from the preoperative impedance. The major emphasis of this study is to devise a model to capture the postoperative hepatic hemodynamics after left hepatectomy. To study this, we build a hepatic network model and analyze its behavior under four different outflow impedance: (a) the same as preoperative impedance; (b) evaluated using the RI and preoperative impedance; (c) computed from structured tree BC with increased radius of terminal vessels; and (d) evaluated using structured tree with both increased radius of root vessel, ie, the outlets of the postoperative hepatic artery, and increased radius of terminal vessels. Our results show that both impedance from (b) and (d) give a physiologically reasonable postoperative hepatic pressure range, while the RI in (b) allows for a fast approximation of postoperative impedance. Since hemodynamics after hepatectomy are not fully understood, the methods used in this study to explore postoperative outflow BC are informative for future models exploring hemodynamic effects of partial hepatectomy.

Donors' Quality of Life after Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Shiraz Organ Transplant Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Probable effects of living donor liver transplantation on the wellbeing of the donor and psychological difficulties are necessary to be understood.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of life of living donors after liver donation.

METHODS

140 living donors who underwent hepatectomy between 2012 and July 2015 were enrolled in this study. Donors were asked to complete the Short Form 36-question Health Survey (SF-36) through face to face or by telephone interview.

RESULTS

The mean±SD age of donors at transplantation was 32.1±7.3 years; 83 (59.3%) of donors were female. 134 (95.7%) were married. The mean±SD BMI was 23.8±3.5 (kg/m²). "Mother-to-child" was the most frequent relationship (n=79, 56.4%). 22 (15.7%) complications were reported by participants. The mean±SD score of Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary were 48.8±14.6 and 50.1±6.9, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Most living donors sustain a near average quality of life post-donation. It seems that living donation does not negatively affect the quality of life.

Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Postoperative Outcomes and Quality of Life in Liver Donors: First Report in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Deceased donor liver transplantation is a rare procedure in Northern Thailand because of cultural issues. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) can decrease waiting list mortality for the patients who have end-stage liver disease. In Thailand, our center is the only active adult-to-adult LDLT program. This study is the first report of outcomes and health-related quality of life in liver donors.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative outcomes and health related quality of life in living liver transplant donors at the Transplant Center in Thailand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing liver resection for adult-to-adult LDLT at our center between March 2010 and July 2018 were evaluated in a cross-sectional study. The effect of donor demographics, operative details, postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification), hospitalization, and health related quality of life was evaluated through health-related quality of life questionnaires (short-form survey, SF-36) RESULTS: A total of 14 donor patients were included in this study with an age range from 26 to 51 years (mean 39.86 years, standard deviation [SD] = 8.59 years). The patients were 71.43% female and 28.57% male. The majority of patients had primary and secondary education (57.14%) and were married (64.29%). After hepatectomy, there was no mortality in the evaluated donors. The Clavien-Dindo classification of postoperative complications were as follows: Grade I (none), Grade II (50%), Grade IIIa (7.14%), and Grade IIIb (7.14%). The serum levels of total protein and albumin were decreased on postoperative day 5. The hospital stays averaged 11.5 days (SD = 4.9 days) and ranged from 5 to 22 days. After considering each aspect of the donors' postoperative quality of life, the highest mean score was related to physical composite scores in physical roles with a mean of 96.42 (SD = 13.36) and physical function with a mean of 95.35 (SD = 13.36). Moreover, the mental composite scores in social function was the highest mean of 91.96 (SD = 12.60) and role emotion was a mean of 90.47 (SD = 27.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Living donor hepatectomy was safe, with an acceptable morbidity, and recognized as a safe procedure with an excellent long-term health quality of life.

Long-term donor quality of life after living donor liver transplantation in Japan

AIMS

This study examined the long-term quality of life (QOL) of living liver donors (LLDs) in Japan using both generic and LLD-specific instruments.

METHODS

The sample comprised 374 LLDs from five university hospitals in Japan who underwent surgery more than a year previously. QOL was evaluated using the Short Form-36 health survey (SF-36) and LLD-QOL scale.

RESULTS

SF-36 results indicated that the overall long-term QOL of LLDs was significantly better than the Japanese standard. When comparing by donor factors, LLDs whose recipients were children scored higher for "satisfaction" than those whose recipients were adults on the LLD-QOL scale. LLDs with complications had lower QOL for "scars" and "burden" on the LLD-QOL scale but no differences in SF-36 scores. LLDs with longer hospital stay had lower physical QOL on SF-36 and lower QOL for "scars" and "after-effects" on the LLD-QOL scale. LLDs whose recipients have died showed lower mental QOL on SF-36 and lower "satisfaction" and greater "lack of understanding of donor health" on the LLD-QOL scale.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multicenter study clarified the long-term QOL of LLDs and suggested that donors' QOL was related to the donors' and recipients' ages, donor's complications and hospital stay length, and recipient's prognosis.

Longterm Impact of Living Liver Donation: A Self-Report of the Donation Experience

Outcomes for adult-to-adult living liver donors (LDs) are largely based on short-term data drawn from single-center studies. The aim of this study was to determine how living liver donation (LLD) impacts self-reported quality-of-life (QOL) up to 6 years after donation in a sample of residents from New York State. New York transplant programs are state-mandated to track LDs as part of a quality assurance and patient safety effort. Donor-reported QOL within 1 year of donation and longitudinal data over a 10-year period were analyzed. Self-reported surveys include the following domains: employment, finances, health/life insurance, activities of daily living, physical/emotional health, donor experience, relationships, and LD opinions. There were 220 LDs in New York (2004-2013) who completed a survey over the 10-year period with many donors completing surveys at several points in time. Overall, longterm LDs remain as comfortable about LLD as they were during the first year after donation (95%). The majority of LDs reported feeling as well as before LLD (72%). At 1 year after donation, 60% of subjects self-reported medical problems, and 30% reported emotional issues. However, the majority reported that they would willingly donate again. In conclusion, LDs remain satisfied with their decision to donate over time. A minority of LDs report longterm medical and emotional issues. The conclusions provide information for educational interventions to improve informed choice to those considering donation.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Health-related quality of life of living liver donors 1 year after donation

Background

Improving the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of living liver donors post-donation is an important aspect of care quality. Analyzing the HRQOL of living liver donors prospectively could help improve our understanding of the recovery of HRQOL and help improve the quality of donor care. In this study, we examined the HRQOL of living liver donors at pre-donation and at 1-year post-donation and analyzed the effect of pre- and post-donation factors on the donors' physical and mental HRQOL.

Methods

This was a prospective study. During the enrollment period (August 2013 to December 2015), 68 living liver donors completed the study questionnaires 5 times: at pre-donation and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-donation. The Medical Outcomes Study Questionnaire Short Form-36, which yields both physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary scores, was used to measure the HRQOL. The pre- and post-donation factors included donation ambivalence, recipients' physical condition, post-donation complications, and recipients' survival status.

Results

Participants' mean PCS scores were 43.59 and 56.50 at 1 and 12 months after donation, respectively, whereas their mean MCS scores were 46.89 and 46.28, respectively. The mean PCS score was worse at 1 month after donation but improved significantly over time (P<0.05); conversely, the MCS was quite stable over time (P>0.05). A good PCS score was associated with no surgical complications of donation (coefficient =2.87, P=0.02), whereas a poor MCS score was associated with an education of less than a bachelor's degree (coefficient =-3.60, P=0.004), a higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in the recipient (coefficient =-0.13, P=0.03), and recipient death (coefficient =-3.48, P=0.03). Pre-donation ambivalence and sense of coherence were not significant predictors of the PCS or MCS scores.

Conclusions

The impact of living liver donation on HRQOL was strongest in the early stages of the post-surgery period for the physical domain. Health-care professionals should carefully manage and monitor the progress of surgical outcomes, particularly in high-risk groups such as donors with a low education level or donors whose recipients have severe illness or end up dying after the surgery. Doing so may allow for suitable intervention opportunities to improve the HRQOL of living liver donors.

Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life in Living Liver Donors

BACKGROUND In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), 2 patients undergo surgery, and the advantages and disadvantages for both patients should be considered. This study evaluated the long-term quality of life in living liver donors, and its impact on their activities of daily living focusing on mood and mental health. MATERIAL AND METHODS In total, 101 living liver donors (69 female and 32 male patients, median age of 36.8 years) were surveyed at a median time of 61.8 months after liver donation (range 7-169 months). The generic Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), and the Questionnaire of Physical Activity (IPAQ) were used. The results of SF-36 were compared to a matched control group (n=72) using the Wilcoxon test; the SF-36, the PHQ-9, and the IPAQ scores were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation. Linear regression model was used to check for dependencies between variables of interest. The IPAQ results were compared between the study group and the general Polish population. RESULTS There were no significant differences in the SF-36 domains between the study group and control group except body pain, which was higher in the living liver donor group (P<0.05). In 30.6% of patients, the PHQ-9 survey revealed mood disturbances. The PHQ-9 scores were higher in female-donors (P<0.05). Both summary scores of the SF-36 correlated to the PHQ-9 (P<0.001). In 89.1% of patients, physical activity was below the population norm and was lower in female donors than in male donors (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS LDLT had no impact on donors' physical and mental health. Physical activity of living liver donors was lower than that of the general population. The SF-36 and the IPAQ measures seem to be reliable in the care of living liver donors. The PHQ-9 survey results and the inclination to depression of female living liver donors requires further study.

Prevalence and Predictors of Patient-Reported Long-term Mental and Physical Health After Donation in the Adult-to-Adult Living-Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Prospective and longitudinal studies have examined liver donors' medical outcomes beyond the first 1 to 2 years postdonation. There is no analogous longitudinal evidence on long-term psychosocial outcomes, including patient-reported clinically significant mental health problems and perceptions of physical well-being. We examined prevalence, descriptive characteristics, and predictors of diagnosable mental health conditions and self-reported physical health problems, including fatigue and pain, in the long-term years after liver donation.

METHODS

Donors from 9 centers who initially completed telephone interviews at 3 to 10 years postdonation (mean, 5.8 years; SD, 1.9) were reinterviewed annually for 2 years using validated measures. Outcomes were examined descriptively. Repeated-measures regression analyses evaluated potential predictors and correlates of outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 517 donors initially interviewed (66% of those eligible), 424 (82%) were reassessed at least once. Prevalence rates of major depression and clinically significant pain were similar to general population norms; average fatigue levels were better than norms. All prevalence rates showed little temporal change. Anxiety and alcohol use disorder rates exceeded normative rates at 1 or more assessments. Longer postdonation hospitalization, female sex, higher body mass index, concerns about donation-related health effects, and burdensome donation-related financial costs were associated with increased risk for most outcomes (P's < 0.05). Men were at higher risk for alcohol use disorder (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Anxiety and alcohol use disorders were more common than would be expected; they may warrant increased research attention and clinical surveillance. Surveillance for long-term problems in the areas assessed may be optimized by targeting donors at higher risk based on identified predictors and correlates.

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

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

Survey of Living Organ Donors' Experience and Directions for Process Improvement

INTRODUCTION

Understanding living organ donors' experience with donation and challenges faced during the process is necessary to guide the development of effective strategies to maximize donor benefit and increase the number of living donors.

METHODS

An anonymous self-administered survey, specifically designed for this population based on key informant interviews, was mailed to 426 individuals who donated a kidney or liver at our institution. Quantitative and qualitative methods including open and axial coding were used to analyze donor responses.

FINDINGS

Of the 141 survey respondents, 94% would encourage others to become donors; however, nearly half (44%) thought the donation process could be improved and offered numerous suggestions. Five major themes arose: (1) desire for greater convenience in testing and scheduling; (2) involvement of previous donors throughout the process; (3) education and promotion of donation through social media; (4) unanticipated difficulties, specifically pain; and (5) financial concerns.

DISCUSSION

Donor feedback has been translated into performance improvements at our hospital, many of which are applicable to other institutions. Population-specific survey development helps to identify vital patient concerns and provides valuable feedback to enhance the delivery of care.

Psychosocial Outcomes 3 to 10 Years After Donation in the Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Studies of liver donors' psychosocial outcomes focus on the short term and rely largely on quality-of-life measures not specific to donation. We sought to examine long-term donation effects on 3 psychosocial domains: perceived physical, emotional, and socioeconomic outcomes.

METHODS

Individuals donating 3 to 10 years previously at 9 centers were eligible for telephone surveys. Survey responses were examined descriptively. Cluster analysis was used to identify distinct donor groups based on response profiles across psychosocial domains. Potential predictors of response profiles were evaluated with regression analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventeen donors (66%) participated (M = 5.8 years postdonation, SD = 1.9). Fifteen percent to 48% of donors endorsed current donation-related physical health problems and concerns, and 7%-60% reported socioeconomic concerns (eg, insurance difficulties, financial expenditures). However, on average, donors experienced high psychological growth, and 90% felt positively about donation. Cluster analysis revealed 5 donor groups. One group showed high psychological benefit, with little endorsement of physical or socioeconomic concerns (15% of donors). Four groups showed less favorable profiles, with varying combinations of difficulties. The largest such group showed high endorsement of physical concerns and financial expenditures, and only modest psychological benefit (31% of donors). Men and nonHispanic whites were most likely to have unfavorable response profiles (Ps < 0.01). Compared with donors aged 19 to 30 years, older donors were less likely to have unfavorable profiles; these differences were significant for donors in the >40 to 50 year age group (Ps < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Even many years postdonation, donors report adverse physical and socioeconomic effects, but positive emotional effects as well. Identification of response profiles and predictors may improve targeting of postdonation surveillance and care.

Adult living donor liver imaging

Adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is increasingly used for the treatment of end-stage liver disease. The three most commonly harvested grafts for LDLT are left lateral segment, left lobe, and right lobe grafts. The left lateral segment graft, which includes Couinaud's segments II and III, is usually used for pediatric recipients or small size recipients. Most of the adult recipients need either a left or a right lobe graft. Whether a left or right lobe graft should be harvested from the donors depends on estimated graft and donor remnant liver volume, as well as biliary and vascular anatomy. Detailed preoperative assessment of the potential donor liver volumetrics, biliary and vascular anatomy, and liver parenchyma is vital to minimize risks to the donors and maximize benefits to the recipients. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are currently the imaging modalities of choice in the preoperative evaluation of potential donors. This review provides an overview of key surgical considerations in LDLT that the radiologists must be aware of, and imaging findings on CT and MRI that the radiologists must convey to the surgeons when evaluating potential donors for LDLT.

Psychological Outcomes of Living Liver Donors From a Multicenter Prospective Study: Results From the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study2 (A2ALL-2)

Although single-center and cross-sectional studies have suggested a modest impact of liver donation on donor psychological well-being, few studies have assessed these outcomes prospectively among a large cohort. We conducted one of the largest, prospective, multicenter studies of psychological outcomes in living liver donors within the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study2 (A2ALL-2) consortium. In total, 271 (91%) of 297 eligible donors were interviewed at least once before donation and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo after donation using validated measures. We found that living liver donors reported low rates of major depressive (0-3%), alcohol abuse (2-5%), and anxiety syndromes (2-3%) at any given assessment in their first 2 years after donation. Between 4.7% and 9.6% of donors reported impaired mental well-being at various time points. We identified significant predictors for donors' perceptions of being better people and experiencing psychological growth following donation, including age, sex, relationship to recipient, ambivalence and motivation regarding donation, and feeling that donation would make life more worthwhile. Our results highlight the need for close psychosocial monitoring for those donors whose recipients died (n=27); some of those donors experienced guilt and concerns about responsibility. Careful screening and targeted, data-driven follow-up hold promise for optimizing psychological outcomes following this procedure for potentially vulnerable donors.

Long-Term Non-End-Stage Renal Disease Risks After Living Kidney Donation

Despite generally positive outcomes and high rates of satisfaction, living kidney donors are at risk for both medical and psychosocial problems. In this review, the authors summarize non-end-stage renal disease (ESRD) risks for donors and describe limitations to the data. We review the evidence of medical risks (e.g. increased cardiovascular disease and mortality, preeclampsia) and psychosocial risks (e.g. mood disturbance, financial burden). We then discuss the evidence of differential risks among subsets and the impact of postdonation events (e.g. development of diabetes). Collectively, available evidence indicates the following. (1) Recognizing the importance of non-ESRD risks has been overshadowed by analyses of the reported risk of ESRD. This imbalance should be remedied. (2) There is little quantification of the true contribution of donation to medical and psychosocial outcomes. (3) Most studies, to date, have been retrospective, with limited sample sizes and diversity and with less-than-ideal controls for comparison of outcomes. (4) Many postdonation events (diabetes and hypertension) can now be reasonably predicted, and their association with adverse outcomes can be quantified. (5) Mechanisms and systems need to be implemented to evaluate and care for donors who develop medical and/or psychosocial problems. (6) Costs to donors are a significant burden, and making donation financially neutral should be a priority.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: outcomes and novel surgical approaches

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the best treatment option for patients with early-stage tumours and accounts for ∼20-40% of all liver transplantations performed at most centres worldwide. The Milan criteria are the most common criteria to select patients with HCC for transplantation but they can be seen as too restrictive. Several proposals have been made for a moderate expansion of the criteria, which result in good outcomes but with an increase in the risk of tumour recurrence. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the outcomes after liver transplantation for HCC, focusing on tumour recurrence in terms of surveillance, prevention and treatment. Additionally, novel surgical techniques have been developed to increase the available pool of organs for liver transplantation (such as living donor liver transplantation, donation after circulatory death and split livers), but the effect of these techniques on patients with HCC is still under debate. Thus, we will describe these techniques and expose the benefits and disadvantages of each surgical approach. Finally, we will comment on the limitations of the current priority policies for liver transplantation and the need to further refine them to better serve the population.