One Living Donor and Two Donations: Sequential Kidney and Liver Donation With 20-Years Interval

Extreme living donation: A single center simultaneous and sequential living liver-kidney donor experience with long-term outcomes under literature review

OBJECTIVES

Living liver and kidney donor surgeries are major surgical procedures applied to healthy people with mortality and morbidity risks not providing any direct therapeutic advantage to the donor. In this study, we aimed to share our simultaneous and sequential living liver-kidney donor experience under literature review in this worldwide rare practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2007 and February 2018, a total of 1109 living donor nephrectomies and 867 living liver donor hepatectomies were performed with no mortality to living-related donors. Eight donors who were simultaneous or sequential living liver-kidney donors in this time period were retrospectively reviewed and presented with their minimum 2- year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 8 donors, 3 of them were simultaneous and 5 of them were sequential liver-kidney donation. All of them were close relatives. Mean age was 39 (26-61) years and mean BMI was 25.7 (17.7-40). In 3 donors, right lobe, in 4 donors, left lateral sector, and in 1 donor, left lobe hepatectomy were performed. Median hospital stay was 9 (7-13) days. Two donors experienced early and late postoperative complications (Grade 3b and Grade 1). No mortality and no other long-term complication occurred.

CONCLUSION

Expansion of the donor pool by utilizing grafts from living donors is a globally-accepted proposition since it provides safety and successful outcomes. Simultaneous or sequential liver and kidney donation from the same donor seems to be a reasonable option for combined liver-kidney transplant recipients in special circumstances with acceptable outcomes.

Landscape of Living Multiorgan Donation in the United States: A Registry-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The donation of multiple allografts from a single living donor is a rare practice, and the patient characteristics and outcomes associated with these procedures are not well described.

METHODS

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 101 living multiorgan donors and their 133 recipients.

RESULTS

The 49 sequential (donations during separate procedures) multiorgan donors provided grafts to 81 recipients: 21 kidney-then-liver, 15 liver-then-kidney, 5 lung-then-kidney, 3 liver-then-intestine, 3 kidney-then-pancreas, 1 lung-then-liver, and 1 pancreas-then-kidney. Of these donors, 38% donated 2 grafts to the same recipient and 15% donated 2 grafts as non-directed donors. Compared to recipients from first-time, single organ living donors, recipients from second-time living donors had similar graft and patient survival. The 52 simultaneous (multiple donations during one procedure) multiorgan donors provided 2 grafts to 1 recipient each: 48 kidney-pancreas and 4 liver-intestine. Donors had median of 13.4 years (interquartile range, 8.3-18.5 years) of follow-up. There was one reported death of a sequential donor (2.5 years after second donation). Few postdonation complications were reported over a median of 116 days (interquartile range, 0-295 days) of follow-up; however, routine living donor follow-up data were sparse. Recipients of kidneys from second-time living donors had similar graft (P = 0.2) and patient survival (P = 0.4) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors. Similarly, recipients of livers from second-time living donors had similar graft survival (P = 0.9) and patient survival (P = 0.7) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful documentation of outcomes is needed to ensure ethical practices in selection, informed consent, and postdonation care of this unique donor community.

Sequential liver-kidney transplantation in a boy with congenital hepatic fibrosis and nephronophthisis from a living donor

A five-yr-old boy developed chronic liver failure and ESKD because of CHF and juvenile NPHP. He underwent sequential liver and kidney transplantation with a compatible blood type from his father, at five yr, seven months and five yr, 11 months old, respectively. Because the patient was not in ESKD, we initially performed LDLT because of significant portal hypertension. Even after LDLT, his ascites was not ameliorated, and he needed continuous drainage of ascites and daily albumin and gamma globulin infusion. Thereafter, he progressed to ESKD and needed hemodialysis for one month before LDKT. CDC crossmatch for donor B cells in the warm test, FCXM for B cell IgG, and flow PRA for donor class II were positive before LDKT. After pretreatment of three courses of plasma exchange and intravenous gamma globulin, LDKT was performed. Two weeks after LDKT, AIHA concomitant with autoimmune thrombocytopenia, also called Evans syndrome, occurred because of passenger lymphocytes from the donor; however, the patient was successfully treated with intravenous methylprednisolone. Eighteen months have passed since LDKT, and liver and kidney function in both the recipient and donor are normal.

A single center experience of combined liver kidney transplantation

With advancements in the operative techniques, patient survival following liver transplantation (LTx) has increased substantially. This has led to the acceleration of pre-existing kidney disease because of immunosuppressive nephrotoxicity making additional kidney transplantation (KTx) inevitable. On the other hand, in a growing number of patients on the waiting list to receive liver, long waiting time has resulted in adverse effect of decompensated liver on the kidney function. During the last two decades, the transplant community has considered combined liver kidney transplantation (CLKTx) to overcome this problem. The aim of our study is to present an overview of our experience as well as a review of the literature in CLKTx and to discuss the controversy in this regard. All performed CLKTx (n = 22) at our institution as well as all available reported case series focusing on CLKTx are extracted. The references of the manuscripts were cross-checked to implement further articles into the review. The analyzed parameters include demographic data, indication for LTx and KTx, duration on the waiting list, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, immunosuppressive regimen, post-transplant complications, graft and patient survival, and cause of death. From 1988 to 2009, a total of 22 CLKTx were performed at our institution. The median age of the patients at the time of CLKTx was 44.8 (range: 4.5-58.3 yr). The indications for LTx were liver cirrhosis, hyperoxaluria type 1, polycystic liver disease, primary or secondary sclerosing cholangitis, malignant hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, cystinosis, and congenital biliary fibrosis. The KTx indications were end-stage renal disease of various causes, hyperoxaluria type 1, polycystic kidney disease, and cystinosis. The mean follow-up duration for CLKTx patients were 4.6 +/- 3.5 yr (range: 0.5-12 yr). Overall, the most important encountered complications were sepsis (n = 8), liver failure leading to retransplantation (n = 4), liver rejection (n = 3), and kidney rejection (n = 1). The overall patient survival rate was 80%. Review of the literature showed that from 1984 to 2008, 3536 CLKTx cases were reported. The main indications for CLKTx were oxalosis of both organs, liver cirrhosis and chronic renal failure, polycystic liver and kidney disease, and liver cirrhosis along with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). The most common encountered complications following CLKTx were infection, bleeding, biliary complications, retransplantation of the liver, acute hepatic artery thrombosis, and retransplantation of the kidney. From the available data regarding the need for post-operative dialysis (n = 673), a total of 175 recipients (26%) required hemodialysis. During the follow-up period, 154 episodes of liver rejection (4.3%) and 113 episodes of kidney rejection (3.2%) occurred. The cumulative 1, 2, 3, and 5 yr survival of both organs were 78.2%, 74.4%, 62.4%, and 60.9%, respectively. Additionally, the cumulative 1, 2, 3, and 5 yr patient survival were 84.9%, 52.8%, 45.4%, and 42.6%, respectively. The total number of reported deaths was 181 of 2808 cases (6.4%), from them the cause of death in 99 (55%) cases was sepsis. It can be concluded that there is still no definitive evidence of better graft and patient survival in CLKTx recipients when compared with LTx alone because of the complexity of the exact definition of irreversible kidney function in LTx candidates. Additionally, CLKTx is better to be performed earlier than isolated LTx and KTx leading to the avoidance of deterioration of clinical status, high rate of graft loss, and mortality. Shorter graft ischemia time and more effective immunosuppressive regimens can reduce the incidence of graft malfunctioning in CLKTx patients. Providing a model to reliably determine the need for CLKTx seems necessary. Such a model can be shaped based upon new and precise markers of renal function, and modification of MELD system.