Donor outcome after living liver donation: a single-center experience

When is it safe for the liver donor to be discharged home and prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations? - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on discharge criteria after living liver donation (LLD).

OBJECTIVES

To identify the features for fit for discharge checklist after LLD to prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations and to provide international expert recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

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

METHODS

Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The critical outcomes included were complications rates and liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR) (CRD42021260725).

RESULTS

Total 57/1710 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 28/57 on the final analysis. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The complications rate was reported in 20/28 studies and ranged from 7.8% to 71.2%. Post hepatectomy liver function was reported in 13 studies. The Quality of Evidence (QoE) was Low and Very-Low for complications rate and liver function test, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Monitoring and prevention of donor complications should be crucial in decision making of discharge. Pain and diet control, removal of all drains and catheters, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, and use routine imaging (CT scan or liver ultrasound) before discharge should be included as fit for discharge checklist (QoE; Low | GRADE of recommendation; Strong). Transient Impaired liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR), a prognostic marker of outcome after liver resection, usually occurs after donor right hepatectomy and should be monitored. Improving trends for bilirubin and INR value should be observed by day 5 post hepatectomy and be included in the fit for discharge checklist. (QoE; Very-Low | GRADE; Strong).

Donor Morbidity Is Equivalent Between Right and Left Hepatectomy for Living Liver Donation: A Meta-Analysis

Maximizing liver graft volume benefits the living donor liver recipient. Whether maximizing graft volume negatively impacts living donor recovery and outcomes remains controversial. Patient randomization between right and left hepatectomy has not been possible due to anatomic constraints; however, a number of published, nonrandomized observational studies summarize donor outcomes between 2 anatomic living donor hepatectomies. This meta-analysis compares donor-specific outcomes after right versus left living donor hepatectomy. Systematic searches were performed via PubMed, Cochrane, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies between January 2005 and November 2019. The primary outcomes compared overall morbidity and incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo >III) between right and left hepatectomy in donors after liver donation. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to derive summary risk estimates of outcomes. A total of 33 studies (3 prospective and 30 retrospective cohort) were used to identify 7649 pooled patients (5993 right hepatectomy and 1027 left hepatectomy). Proportion of donors who developed postoperative complications did not significantly differ after right hepatectomy (0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.40) and left hepatectomy (0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.29; P = 0.19). The overall risk ratio (RR) did not differ between right and left hepatectomy (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.83-1.63; P = 0.36). The relative risk for a donor to develop severe complications showed no differences by hepatectomy side (Incidence rate ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.67-1.40; P = 0.86). There is no evidence that the overall morbidity differs between right and left lobe donors. Publication bias reflects institutional and surgeon variation. A prospective, standardized, multi-institutional study would help quantify the burden of donor complications after liver donation.

Donor safety in living donor liver donation: An Italian multicenter survey

Major concerns about donor morbidity and mortality still limit the use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to overcome the organ shortage. The present study assessed donor safety in LDLT in Italy reporting donor postoperative outcomes in 246 living donation procedures performed by 7 transplant centers. Outcomes were evaluated over 2 time periods using the validated Clavien 5-tier grading system, and several clinical variables were analyzed to determine the risk factors for donor morbidity. Different grafts were obtained from the 246 donor procedures (220 right lobe, 10 left lobe, and 16 left lateral segments). The median follow-up after donation was 112 months. There was no donor mortality. One or more complications occurred in 82 (33.3%) donors, and 3 of them had intraoperative complications (1.2%). Regardless of graft type, the rate of major complications (grade ≥ 3) was 12.6% (31/246). The overall donor morbidity and the rate of major complications did not differ significantly over time: 26 (10.6%) donors required hospital readmission throughout the follow-up period, whereas 5 (2.0%) donors required reoperation. Prolonged operative time (>400 minutes), intraoperative hypotension (systolic < 100 mm Hg), vascular abnormalities, and intraoperative blood loss (>300 mL) were multivariate risk factors for postoperative donor complications. In conclusion, from the standpoint of living donor surgery, a meticulous and well-standardized technique that reduces operative time and prevents blood loss and intraoperative hypotension may reduce the incidence of donor complications. Transparency in reporting results after LDLT is mandatory, and we should continue to strive for zero donor mortality. Liver Transplantation 23 184-193 2017 AASLD.

Fluid management in living donor hepatectomy: Recent issues and perspectives

The importance of the safety of healthy living liver donors is widely recognized during donor hepatectomy which is associated with blood loss, transfusion, and subsequent post-operative morbidity. Although the low central venous pressure (CVP) technique can still be effective, it may not be advantageous concerning the safety of healthy donors undergoing hepatectomy. Emerging evidence suggests that stroke volume variation (SVV), a simple and useful index for fluid responsiveness and preload status in various clinical situations, can be applied as a guide for fluid management to reduce blood loss during living donor hepatectomy. Synthetic colloid solutions are also associated with serious adverse events such as the use of renal replacement therapy and transfusion in critically ill or septic patients. However, it is uncertain whether the intra-operative use of colloid solution is associated with similarly adverse effects in patients undergoing living donor hepatectomy. In this review article we discuss the recent issues regarding the low CVP technique and the high SVV method, i.e., maintaining 10%-20% of SVV, for fluid management in order to reduce blood loss during living donor hepatectomy. In addition, we briefly discuss the effects of intra-operative colloid or crystalloid administration for surgical rather than septic or critically ill patients.

The role of adult living donor liver transplantation and recent advances

Twenty years since the first cases were described, adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is now considered a valid option to expand the donor pool in view of the ongoing shortage of organs and the high waiting list mortality rate. Despite the rapid evolution and acceptance of this complex process of donation and transplantation in clinical practice, the indications, outcome, ethical considerations and quality and safety aspects continue to evolve based on new data from large cohort studies. This article reviews the surgical and clinical advances in the field of liver transplantation, focusing on technical refinements and discussing the issues that may lead to a further expansion of this complex surgical procedure and the role of ALDLT.

Donor morbidity including biliary complications in living-donor liver transplantation: single-center analysis of 827 cases

BACKGROUND

Because of the shortage of deceased-donor livers for transplantation, living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an indispensible treatment strategy for end-stage liver disease. The critical prerequisite for LDLT is the maximal safety of healthy donors.

METHODS

From June 1996 to November 2010, a total of 827 completed donor hepatectomies were performed in our center. We analyzed donor morbidity associated with LDLT.

RESULTS

There was no donor mortality. No complications were observed in 744 (90.0%) donors, and 83 (10.0%) donors experienced complications. Wound complications were most common, occurring in 48 (5.8%) patients. According to a modified Clavien classification, grade I, grade II, grade IIIa, and grade IIIb complications were experienced in 56 (67.5%), 2 (2.4%), 15 (18.1%), and 10 (12.0%) donors, respectively. Surgical or interventional management was successful in all grade IIIa and grade IIIb donors. The incidence of biliary complications was significantly higher in younger donors. Donor morbidity did not decrease below the attained level even after time had passed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the safety of donor hepatectomy. Complications were relatively minor and easily controlled. The incidence of biliary complications and donor age was inversely correlated. The procedural experience of the surgeons was not associated with the donor complication rate.

Outcome of right hepatectomy for living liver donors: a single Egyptian center experience

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate living liver donor outcome after right hepatectomy in a single Egyptian center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April 2004 and July 2010, 100 living donors underwent right hepatectomy. Their medical records and postoperative follow-up visits were retrospectively revised. Perioperative complications were reported. Postoperative complications were classified according to the five tier version of Clavien system.

RESULTS

There were 71 males and 29 females. The mean age was 27.6 ± 7.4 years. The mean graft weight was 999 ± 167 g and the mean volume percent of the remaining liver was 36.8 ± 8%. The mean ICU and hospital stay were 2.6 ± 2.7 and 12.4 ± 9.1, respectively. A total of 57 complications developed in 38 donors (38%). The commonest complication type was biliary complications. There were 22 grade I, 6 grade II, 15 grade IIIa, 12 grade IIIb, 1 grade IVa, and 1 grade V complications. One donor died due to posttransfusion ARDS on the 30th postoperative day. On follow-up, no donor developed long lasting disability. A donor died in a road traffic accident 1 year after donation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Donor right hepatectomy is not an entirely safe procedure. Biliary complications are the commonest early postoperative complications.

Short- and long-term donor morbidity in right lobe living donor liver transplantation: 91 consecutive cases in a European Center

The lack of use of a common grading system in reporting morbidity impedes estimation of the true risk to a right lobe living donor (RLLD). We report outcomes in 91 consecutive RLLD's using the validated 5-tier Clavien grading and a quality of life (QOL) questionnaire. The median follow-up was 79 months. The donors were predominantly female (66%), 22 (24%) received autologous blood transfusions. Fifty-three complications occurred in 43 donors (47% morbidity), 19 (37%) were ≥ Grade III, biliary fistula (14%) was the most common. There was no donor mortality. Two intraoperative complications could not be graded and two disfiguring complications in female donors were graded as minor. Two subgroups (first 46 vs. later 45 donors) were compared to study the presence if any, of a learning curve. The later 45 donors had lesser autologous transfusions, lesser rehospitalization and no reoperation and a reduction in the proportion of ≥ Grade III (major) complications (24% vs. 50%; p = 0.06). In the long term, donors expressed an overall sense of well being, but some sequelae of surgery do restrain their current lifestyle. Our results warn against lackadaisical vigilance once RLLD hepatectomy becomes routine.

Gender-specific differences associated with living donor liver transplantation: a review study

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has developed into an important therapeutic option for liver diseases. For living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), gender-specific differences have been observed among both donors (two-thirds being women and one-third being men) and recipients (two-thirds being men and one-third being women). The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a gender disparity for LDLT. We contacted 89 national and international transplantation registries, single transplant centers, and coordinators. In addition, a sample of 274 articles dealing with LDLT and its outcomes was reviewed and compared with the registry data. The data included the gender of the donors and recipients, the country of transplantation, and the donor-recipient relationship. The investigation showed that overall there were slightly more men among the donors (53% male and 47% female). As for the recipients, 59% of the organs were distributed to males, and 41% were distributed to females. Differences in the gender distribution were observed with respect to individual countries. Worldwide, 80% of the donors were blood-related, 11% were not blood-related, and 9% were spouses. The data acquired from the publications were similar to the registry data. Our research has shown that there are hardly any registry data published, a lot of countries do not have national registries, or the access to these data is difficult. Even widely ranging published studies often do not give information on the gender distribution or the donor-recipient relationship. Further investigations are needed to understand the possible medical, psychosocial, or cultural reasons for gender distribution in LDLT and the differences in comparison with LDKT.

Complications of right lobe living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Right lobar living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been controversial because of donor deaths and widely variable reports of recipient and donor morbidity. Our aims were to ensure full disclosure to donors and recipients of the risks and benefits of this procedure in a large University center and to help explain reporting inconsistencies.

METHODS

The Clavien 5-tier grading system was applied retrospectively in 121 consecutive adult right lobe recipients and their donors. The incidence was determined of potentially (Grade III), actually (Grade IV), or ultimately fatal (Grade V) complications during the first post-transplant year. When patients had more than one complication, only the seminal one was counted, or the most serious one if complications occurred contemporaneously.

RESULTS

One year recipient/graft survival was 91%/84%. Within the year, 80 (66%) of the 121 recipients had Grade III (n=54) Grade IV (n=16), or Grade V (n=10) complications. The complications involved the graft's biliary tract (42% incidence), graft vasculature (15%), or non-graft locations (9%). Complications during the first year did not decline with increased team experience, and adversely affected survival out to 5 years. All 121 donors survive. However, 13 donors (10.7%) had Grade III (n=9) or IV (n=4) complications of which five were graft-related.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the satisfactory recipient and graft survival at our and selected other institutions, and although we have not had a donor mortality to date, the role of right lobar LDLT is not clear because of the recipient morbidity and risk to the donors.

The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications

BACKGROUND

A severity grading system is essential to reporting surgical complications. In 1992, we presented such a system (T92). Its use and that of systems derived from it have increased exponentially. Our purpose was to determine how well T92 and its modifications have functioned as a severity grading system and to develop an improved system for reporting complications.

METHODS

129 articles were studied in detail. Twenty variables were searched for in each article with particular emphasis on type of study, substitution of qualitative terms for grades, grade compression, and cut-points if grade compression was used. We also determined relative distribution of complications and manner of presentation of complications.

RESULTS

T92 and derivative classifications have received wide use in surgical studies ranging from small studies with few complications to large studies of complex operations that describe many complications. There is a strong tendency to contract classifications and to substitute terms with self evident meaning for the numerical grades. Complications are presented in a large variety of tabular forms some of which are much easier to follow than others.

CONCLUSIONS

Current methods for reporting the severity of complications incompletely fulfill the needs of authors of surgical studies. A new system-the Accordion Severity Grading System-is presented. The Accordion system can be used more readily for small as well as large studies. It introduces standard definition of simple quantitative terms and presents a standard tabular reporting system. This system should bring the field closer to a common severity grading method for surgical complications.

The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The lack of consensus on how to define and grade adverse postoperative events has greatly hampered the evaluation of surgical procedures. A new classification of complications, initiated in 1992, was updated 5 years ago. It is based on the type of therapy needed to correct the complication. The principle of the classification was to be simple, reproducible, flexible, and applicable irrespective of the cultural background. The aim of the current study was to critically evaluate this classification from the perspective of its use in the literature, by assessing interobserver variability in grading complex complication scenarios and to correlate the classification grades with patients', nurses', and doctors' perception.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Reports from the literature using the classification system were systematically analyzed. Next, 11 scenarios illustrating difficult cases were prepared to develop a consensus on how to rank the various complications. Third, 7 centers from different continents, having routinely used the classification, independently assessed the 11 scenarios. An agreement analysis was performed to test the accuracy and reliability of the classification. Finally, the perception of the severity was tested in patients, nurses, and physicians by presenting 30 scenarios, each illustrating a specific grade of complication.

RESULTS

We noted a dramatic increase in the use of the classification in many fields of surgery. About half of the studies used the contracted form, whereas the rest used the full range of grading. Two-thirds of the publications avoided subjective terms such as minor or major complications. The study of 11 difficult cases among various centers revealed a high degree of agreement in identifying and ranking complications (89% agreement), and enabled a better definition of unclear situations. Each grade of complications significantly correlated with the perception by patients, nurses, and physicians (P < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test).

CONCLUSIONS

This 5-year evaluation provides strong evidence that the classification is valid and applicable worldwide in many fields of surgery. No modification in the general principle of classification is warranted in view of the use in ongoing publications and trials. Subjective, inaccurate, or confusing terms such as "minor or major" should be removed from the surgical literature.