Living donor liver transplantation: ethics and safety

Healthcare Resource Utilization After Living Liver Donation: A Retrospective Case-control Study

BACKGROUND

Living liver donation is generally considered safe, but donors may experience short or long-term complications. The purpose of this study was to assess healthcare resource utilization after liver donation in living liver donors in comparison to the general population.

METHODS

Outpatient or emergency department visits and hospital admissions were compared between living liver donors who underwent hepatic resection for living liver donation between 2004 and 2018 and the matched general population. Healthcare resource utilization data for 5 years after liver donation were collected from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database. For every living liver donor, 4 individually matched nondonors were selected from the NHIS database using age, sex, preexisting comorbidities, and previous healthcare utilization history.

RESULTS

A total of 1886 living liver donors and 7309 nondonors were included. In the first year after donation, living liver donors required more outpatient department visits (7 [4-13] vs. 3 [1-7], P < 0.001) and more emergency department visits (13.33% vs. 0.15%, P < 0.001) compared to matched nondonors. A similar trend persisted for 5 years after donation. The number of hospital admissions of living liver donors was higher for up to 2 years after donation with longer hospital length of stay (13.0 [10.5-16.0] vs. 5.0 [3.0-9.0] days, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare resource utilization in living liver donors for 5 years after donation were higher compared to matched nondonors. The higher healthcare resource demand may be related to postoperative complications or lowered threshold for healthcare resource utilization after donation.Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TP/C291.

Our Living Donor Protocol for Liver Transplant: A SingleCenter Experience

OBJECTIVES

The shortage of deceased donor organs is a limiting factor in transplant. The growing discrepancy between the wait list demand versus the supply of deceased donor organs has created an incentive for consideration of living donor liver transplant as an alternative. Here, we describe our evaluation process and donor complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 1988, we have performed 659 (449 living donor and 210 deceased donor) liver transplants. The most important evaluation criteria is the relationship between donor and recipient, and we require thatthe donor must be related to the recipient. The evaluation protocol has 5 stages. Donor complications were defined as simple, moderate, and severe.

RESULTS

We retrospectively investigated data for 1387 candidates, and 938 (67.7%) were rejected; subsequently, 449 living donor liver transplants were performed. There were no complications in 398 of the donors (88.7%). Total complication rate was 11.3%. Simple complications were seen in 31 patients (6.9%). Moderate complications were seen in 19 patients (4.2%). We had only 1 severe complication, ie, organ failure from unspecified liver necrosis, which resulted in death.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between donor and recipient and donor safety should be the primary focus for living donor liver transplant. Donor selection should be made carefully to minimize complications and provide adequately functional grafts.

Role of the Independent Donor Advocacy Team in Ethical Decision Making

Adult living donor liver transplantation has developed as a direct result of the critical shortage of deceased donors. Recent regulations passed by New York State require transplant programs to appoint an Independent Donor Advocacy Team to evaluate, educate, and consent to all potential living liver donors. Ethical issues surround the composition of the team, who appoints them, and the role the team plays in the process. Critics of living liver donation have questioned issues surrounding motivation and the ability of donors to provide true informed consent during a time of family crisis. This article will address issues surrounding the controversies and discuss how using the team can effectively evaluate and educate potential living liver donors and improve practice to ensure safety of living donors.

Social Work Interventions with Living Related Liver Donors: The Implications for Practice

Living related liver donations are increasingly used to address the lack of organs available to patients faced with end-stage liver disease. A significant need exists for enhanced psychosocial intervention for donors. We sought to explore donor reactions by assessing psychosocial issues after donation. A descriptive review of donors was undertaken. The overall incidence of psychosocial issues after donation was examined by using a uniform interview questionnaire and by anecdotal case studies. Responses tend to indicate a general positive reaction to donation; yet, findings suggest a need for more preparation in the predonor stage, 100% social work follow-up after donation to provide needed support services, and inclusion of the donor as a critical partner in organ transplant treatment. A more extensive study drawing on the questionnaire may offer a standardized approach to the treatment of organ donors.

Philosophy of organ donation: Review of ethical facets

Transplantation ethics is a philosophy that incorporates systematizing, defending and advocating concepts of right and wrong conduct related to organ donation. As the demand for organs increases, it is essential to ensure that new and innovative laws, policies and strategies of increasing organ supply are bioethical and are founded on the principles of altruism and utilitarianism. In the field of organ transplantation, role of altruism and medical ethics values are significant to the welfare of the society. This article reviews several fundamental ethical principles, prevailing organ donation consent laws, incentives and policies related to the field of transplantation. The Ethical and Policy Considerations in Organ Donation after Circulatory Determination of Death outline criteria for death and organ retrieval. Presumed consent laws prevalent mostly in European countries maintain that the default choice of an individual would be to donate organs unless opted otherwise. Explicit consent laws require organ donation to be proactively affirmed with state registries. The Declaration of Istanbul outlines principles against organ trafficking and transplant tourism. World Health Organization's Guiding Principles on Human Cell, Tissue and Organ Transplantation aim at ensuring transparency in organ procurement and allocation. The ethics of financial incentives and non-financial incentives such as incorporation of non-medical criteria in organ priority allocation have also been reviewed in detail.

Thromboelastography to monitor clotting/bleeding complications in patients treated with the molecular adsorbent recirculating system

Background. The Molecular Adsorbent Recirculating System (MARS) has been shown to clear albumin-bound toxins from patients with liver failure but might cause bleeding complications potentially obscuring survival benefits. We hypothesized that monitoring clotting parameters and bed-side thromboelastography allows to reduce bleeding complications. Methods. Retrospective analysis of 25 MARS sessions during which clotting parameters were monitored by a standardized protocol. Results. During MARS therapy median INR increased significantly from 1.7 to 1.9 platelet count and fibrinogen content decreased significantly from 57 fL(-1) to 42 fL(-1) and 2.1 g/L to 1.5 g/L. Nine relevant complications occurred: the MARS system clotted 6 times 3 times we observed hemorrhages. Absent thrombocytopenia and elevated plasma fibrinogen predicted clotting of the MARS system (ROC 0.94 and 0.82). Fibrinolysis, detected by thromboelastography, uniquely predicted bleeding events. Conclusion. Bed-side thromboelastography and close monitoring of coagulation parameters can predict and, therefore, help prevent bleeding complications during MARS therapy.

Postsurgical complications in living-related liver donors

From September 2001 until March 2007, we performed 127 living-donor liver transplantations in our transplantation center. Of 127 donors, 74 were men and 53 women, of overall mean donor age of 35.2 +/- 9.3 years (range, 20-56 years). Ninety-six (75.6%) were first-degree relatives, 18 (14.1%) were second-degree relatives, and 13 (10.3%) were spouses. We performed 34 (26.7%) left hepatic lobectomies, 33 (25.3%) left lateral segmentectomies, and 60 (48%) right hepatic lobectomies. The mean percentages of remnant to donor total liver volume for the right, left, and left-lateral lobectomies were 41.7%, 67.8%, and 75.1%, respectively. The mean length of patient postoperative hospital stay was 7.4 +/- 3.1 days (range, 3-33 days). There was no postoperative mortality. Ten complications occurred in 7 of the 127 donors (5.5%). Most complications were treated with radiologic interventions. In conclusion, donor safety should be the primary focus in living-donor liver transplantation. More experience, improved surgical techniques, and meticulous donor evaluation will help to minimize morbidity and mortality for living liver donors.

Right Hepatic Lobe Donation: Impact on Donor Quality of Life

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of living-donor liver transplantation on the donor's quality of life. Among the 48 performed at our hospital from October 2003 to June 2006, 46 (27 men, 19 women; mean age, 37.4 years) were followed for more than 4 months (mean, 16.5+/-8 months). In April 2006, these donors participated in a survey that included medical and psychosocial outcomes. Seven complications occurred in four of 46 donors (8.6%): two biliary leaks, two wound infections, one incisional hernia, one portal vein thrombosis, and one deep venous thrombosis. For the donor with portal vein thrombosis, the vein was recanalized, and she recovered without treatment; a bile leak from the cut liver surface and an incisional hernia also developed in the same donor. The biliary leak was treated with percutaneous drainage, and the incisional hernia was repaired surgically. Fifteen donors were housewives, 31 worked outside the home, and 94% returned to their work. A change in body image was reported in 4.3% of the donors. None reported impaired sexual function. Complete recovery occurred in 86% of donors, 94% of the donors said that they would donate again if necessary, and 97% believe that they had benefited from the donation experience. In conclusion, almost all donors were able to return to their prior jobs within a few months of surgery, and most donors were satisfied with the donation procedure.

[Living donor liver transplantation from the perspective of the donor: results of a psychosomatic investigation]

OBJECTIVES

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been gaining importance in the treatment of endstage liver disease in adults. Thus far, only few empirical studies have been published on the psychosocial situation of donors who are faced with the risk of medical complications after resection of the right hepatic lobe. The aims were to describe the clinical problems before and after transplantation and to contribute to the discussion of ethical issues based on empirical findings.

METHODS

In the present overview, the pre-/post-transplant and follow-up periods are characterized from a psychosocial point of view using actual psychosocial and medical findings in living donors of the right hepatic lobe.

RESULTS

Before LDLT, 11 % of potential donors were not recommended for the transplantation due to marked ambivalence about the operation. After donation 26 % of donors showed high values for anxious depression and physical complaints despite low rates of surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

For clinical psychosomatic evaluations of potential donors it is important to provide donors an opportunity to report any misgivings and anxieties as openly as possible. The psychosocial impairment and physical complaints of some donors after transplantation are yet not clearly understood. More psychosocial studies in this field will be necessary to investigate ethical questions and to develop criteria for an evidence-based medical care of living donors.

Decision-Related Factors and Attitudes Toward Donation in Living Related Liver Transplantation: Ten-Year Experience

INTRODUCTION

Living related liver transplantation (LRLT) has been performed since 1994 in Korea; more than 600 donors have contributed to our successful LRLT program for 10 years. Although the decision to donate is difficult and the donors need a formal psychosocial assessment, no system has been available to us for the assessment. This survey was performed as a presurveillance for the development of a psychosocial assessment protocol.

METHODS

A survey questionnaire included 31 questions on general and medical characteristics, factors, and processes related to the decision for donation. Donors of partial livers at least 6 months ago during the period from December 1994 to August 2003 and whose address could be confirmed by telephone were enrolled in the study.

RESULTS

A questionnaire was sent by mail to 441 contactable donors of whom 209 (47.4%) responded. Male-to-female ratio was 2:1 and mean age was 32.8 years (range: 16 to 60 years). The number of spousal donors was 120 (57.4%) and 164 (78.5%) donors were employed at the time of donation. Protestants, Buddhists, and Catholics were 29.2%, 19.1%, and 14.8%, respectively. Parents were the most common recipients (33.0%), followed by siblings (17.2%), extended family members (17.2%), and children (15.8%); one hundred eighty nine (90.4%) donors had decided by themselves, the major reason for donation in 192 (91.9%) donors was "to save the lives of family members and relatives." The first person who suggested donation was the donor (64.1%), followed by family members (23.9%) or the attending physicians (8.6%). Although 70.8% of donors answered that they were not hesitant to donate at the time of decision, 44.5% were uneasy at the possibility of being unable to sustain a normal life after donation, at their lack of knowledge on organ donation, and about the pain and fear of surgery. Family members and relatives (53.3%), medical personnel (46.7%), and previous donors (35.4%) were the preferable counselors compared to transplantation institutions and clergymen. The large majority (80.8%) of donors would encourage others to donate.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the decision to donate was made by the donors themselves in most cases and they appeared firm and determined about their decision, a significant number of donors felt uneasy about possible complications of organ donation and effects on their lives after donation. A precise and formal psychosocial assessment protocol is needed to support and secure their decision before and after donation.

Impact of hepatitis C viral infection in primary cadaveric liver allograft versus primary living-donor allograft in 100 consecutive liver transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus

BACKGROUND

There has been concern that adult living-donor liver transplantation (LLTx) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection may lead to recurrent disease that is more severe compared with the results of cadaveric LTx (CLTx), because the smaller sized graft in LLTx regenerates and may increase viral replication. This study examines the survival outcome and HCV recurrence in CLTx versus LLTx performed at a single institution.

METHOD

A total of 100 consecutive adult recipients (75 men and 25 women; mean age 49.9+/-8.4 years) of LTx (65 CLTxs and 35 LLTxs performed July 2000-July 2002) who tested positive for HCV by polymerase chain reaction were examined retrospectively until October 2003. All patients received tacrolimus-based immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil and steroids.

RESULTS

The overall actual patient survival was 85% (83.1% for CLTx vs. 88.6% for LLTx). The 39-month Kaplan-Meier actuarial patient survivals were 75.1% for CLTx and 88.6% for LLTx. Of 15 deaths, 6 were the result of recurrent HCV (five CLTxs and one LLTx), and of 10 retransplants, 2 were related to recurrent HCV (one CLTx and one LLTx). The rates of recurrence were 72.3% and 77.1%, the hepatitis activity indices were 5.4 + 2.4 and 6.2 + 2.8, the fibrosis scores were 1.4+/-1.4 and 1.5+/-1.3, and the times to recurrence were 318+/-269 days and 394+/-250 days for CLTx and LLTx, respectively. None of the differences between the two groups were significant.

CONCLUSION

No detrimental effect of HCV infection was found in LLTx recipients when compared with contemporaneous CLTx recipients. Patient survival, graft survival, rate of HCV recurrence, severity of HCV recurrence, graft loss from HCV, and interval for recurrence in CLTx and LLTx were similar.