Is 0.6% Reasonable as the Minimum Requirement of the Graft-to-recipient Weight Ratio Regardless of Lobe Selection in Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation?

Appropriate methods of evaluating future liver remnant volume to predict postoperative liver failure after major hepatectomy based on the body mass of patients with normal hepatic reserve

PURPOSE

Several parameters are used to assess future liver remnant (FLR) size before major hepatectomy. This study aimed to clarify which is the most appropriate method to use for the prediction of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF).

METHODS

The subjects of this study were 307 patients with Child-Pugh class A only, who underwent major hepatectomy, to focus on FLR size. The parameters we evaluated for their accuracy in predicting Grade B/C PHLF (PHLF B/C) using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were FLR volume (FLRV), the FLRV to total liver volume ratio (FLRV/TLV), standard liver volume (FLRV/SLV), and body weight (FLRV/BW) according to body mass.

RESULTS

The predictive value accuracy of these four parameters for PHLF was similar for the entire cohort. However, in the subgroup analysis based on body mass index, FLRV/BW accuracy was highest in the obese group, whereas that of FLRV/TLV was highest in the lean group. Multivariate analysis identified that FLRV/BW (< 0.7%) and blood loss (≥ 1000 ml) were independent risk factors for PHLF B/C in the obese group. In the lean group, FLRV/TLV (< 40%) and biliary reconstruction were risk factors for PHLF B/C.

CONCLUSIONS

The FLR size evaluation method for predicting PHLF should be appropriately selected based on the patient's body mass.

Prediction and management of small-for-size syndrome in living donor liver transplantation

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) remains a critical challenge in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), characterized by graft insufficiency due to inadequate liver volume, leading to significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. As the global adoption of LDLT increases, the ability to predict and manage SFSS has become paramount in optimizing recipient outcomes. This review provides a comprehensive examination of the pathophysiology, risk factors, and strategies for managing SFSS across the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases. The pathophysiology of SFSS has evolved from being solely volume-based to incorporating portal hemodynamics, now recognized as small-for-flow syndrome. Key risk factors include donor-related parameters like age and graft volume, recipient-related factors such as MELD score and portal hypertension, and intraoperative factors related to venous outflow and portal inflow modulation. Current strategies to mitigate SFSS include careful graft selection based on graft-to-recipient weight ratio and liver volumetry, surgical techniques to optimize portal hemodynamics, and novel interventions such as splenic artery ligation and hemiportocaval shunts. Pharmacological agents like somatostatin and terlipressin have also shown promise in modulating portal pressure. Advances in 3D imaging and artificial intelligence-based volumetry further aid in preoperative planning. This review emphasizes the importance of a multifaceted approach to prevent and manage SFSS, advocating for standardized definitions and grading systems. Through an integrated approach to surgical techniques, hemodynamic monitoring, and perioperative management, significant strides can be made in improving the outcomes of LDLT recipients. Further research is necessary to refine these strategies and expand the application of LDLT, especially in challenging cases involving small-for-size grafts.

Clinical Significance of Grade A Small-for-size Syndrome After Living Donor Liver Transplantation Utilizing the New Definition of Diagnostic Criteria: An International Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

New diagnostic criteria have recently been established to classify small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) after living donor liver transplantation into 3 groups based on severity. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of grade A SFSS and identify the mortality risk.

METHODS

We collected data from 406 patients diagnosed with grade A SFSS after living donor liver transplantation. Grade A SFSS is characterized by total bilirubin >5 mg/dL on postoperative day (POD) 7 or total bilirubin >5 mg/dL or ascites >1 L/d on POD 14. After propensity score matching, 193 patients were categorized into the up-trend group, down-trend group, and ascites group, with 43 patients (22.3%) in the up-trend group (total bilirubin on POD 7 < POD 14), 107 patients (55.4%) in the down-trend group (total bilirubin on POD 7 > POD 14), and 43 patients (22.3%) in the ascites group (only satisfying ascites criteria).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in survival between patients with grade A SFSS and those without SFSS ( P  = 0.152). The up-trend group showed a higher 90-d mortality rate than the down-trend and ascites groups ( P  = 0.025). The 1-y survival rate differed significantly between the groups (87.6%, 91.9%, and 97.7%, respectively; P  = 0.044). The independent risk factors for survival were up-trend of total bilirubin, recipient age (65 y and older), model for end-stage liver disease score (≥30), and ABO incompatibility. Patients with ≥2 risk factors had worse survival rates than those with none and only 1 risk factor ( P  < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the survival rate was comparable between the grade A SFSS and non-SFSS cohorts, the up-trend group showed worse survival. Aggressive interventions should be considered for up-trend patients with risk factors.

Indications and recipient outcomes of adult left lobe living donor liver transplantation

Adult left lobe living donor liver transplantation has long been practiced nearly exclusively in Japan. To overcome the potential risks of small-for-size syndrome and hepatic venous outflow obstruction associated with the use of left lobe grafts, center-specific countermeasures such as splenectomy, meticulous hepatic venous reconstruction, and inclusion of the caudate lobe have been implemented, resulting in short- and long-term results comparable with those of right lobe graft in high-volume centers. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis confirmed these observations; however, the indications and techniques of adult left lobe living donor liver transplantation have yet to be standardized. Recently, there is a growing momentum in the Western countries toward adult left lobe living donor liver transplantation to expand the donor pool in an era of severe organ scarcity and decrease waitlist mortality rates. The introduction of minimally invasive living-donor hepatectomy is expected to further facilitate the use of left lobe grafts.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Using Left and Right Liver Grafts in Adult-to-adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation has been widely performed as an alternative to the scarce liver grafts from deceased donors. More studies are reporting favorable outcomes of left liver graft (LLG). This study compared the clinical outcomes between living-donor liver transplantation using LLG and right liver graft (RLG) with similar graft-to-recipient body weight ratios.

METHODS

This study analyzed 4601 patients from a multicenter observational cohort using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry between 2014 and 2021. After matching the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score and graft-to-recipient body weight ratios because of the extremely different number in each group, the LLG and RLG groups comprised 142 (25.1%) and 423 (74.9%) patients, respectively.

RESULTS

For donors, the median age was higher in the LLG group than in the RLG group (34 y [range, 16-62 y] versus 30 y [16-66 y] ; P  = 0.002). For recipients, the LLG group showed higher 90-d mortality than the RLG group (11 [7.7%] versus 9 [2.1%]; P  = 0.004). The long-term graft survival was significantly worse in the LLG group ( P  = 0.011). In multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis for graft survival, LLG was not a significant risk factor (hazard ratio, 1.01 [0.54-1.87]; P  = 0.980). Otherwise, donor age (≥40 y; 2.18 y [1.35-3.52 y]; P  = 0.001) and recipients' body mass index (<18.5 kg/m 2 ; 2.98 kg/m 2 [1.52-5.84 kg/m 2 ]; P  = 0.002) were independent risk factors for graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the short-term and long-term graft survival was worse in the LLG group, LLG was not an independent risk factor for graft survival in multivariate analysis. LLGs are still worth considering for selected donors and recipients regarding risk factors for graft survival.

International multicenter study of ultralow graft-to-recipient weight ratio grafts in adult living donor liver transplantation

Decreasing the graft size in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) increases the risk of early allograft dysfunction. Graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) of 0.8 is considered the threshold. There is evidence that smaller volume grafts may also provide equally good outcomes, the cut-off of which remains unknown. In this retrospective multicenter study, 92 adult LDLTs with a final GRWR ≤0.6 performed at 12 international liver transplant centers over a 3-year period were included. Perioperative data including preoperative status, portal flow hemodynamics (PFH) and portal flow modulation, development of small for size syndrome (SFSS), morbidity, and mortality was collated and analyzed. Thirty-two (36.7%) patients developed SFSS and this was associated with increased 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality. The preoperative model for end-stage liver disease and inpatient status were independent predictors for SFSS (P < .05). Pre-liver transplant renal dysfunction was an independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio 3.1; 95% confidence intervals 1.1, 8.9, P = .035). PFH or portal flow modulation were not predictive of SFSS or survival. We report the largest ever multicenter study of LDLT outcomes using ultralow GRWR grafts and for the first time validate the International Liver Transplantation Society-International Living donor liver transplantation study group-Liver Transplantation Society of India consensus definition and grading of SFSS. Preoperative recipient condition rather than GRWR and PFH were independent predictors of SFSS. Algorithms to predict SFSS and LT outcomes should incorporate recipient factors along with GRWR.

Revisiting the Prognostic Influences of Donor-Recipient Size Mismatch in Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation

Background

Liver transplantation (LT) outcomes are influenced by donor-recipient size mismatch. This study re-evaluated the impact on graft size discrepancies on survival outcomes.

Methods

Data from 53 389 adult LT recipients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2013-2022) were reviewed. The study population was divided by the body surface area index (BSAi), defined as the ratio of donor body surface area (BSA) to recipient BSA, into small-for-size (BSAi < 0.78), normal-for-size (BSAi 0.78-1.24), and large-for-size (BSAi > 1.24) grafts in deceased donor LT (SFSD, NFSD, and LFSD). Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted.

Results

The frequency of size mismatch in deceased donor LT increased over the past 10 y. SFSD had significantly worse 90-d graft survival (P < 0.01), and LFSD had inferior 1-y graft survival among 90-d survivors (P = 0.01). SFSD was hazardous within 90 d post-LT because of vascular complications. Beyond 1 y, graft size did not affect graft survival. LFSD risk within the first year was mitigated with lower model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) 3.0 scores (<35) or shorter cold ischemia time (<8 h).

Conclusions

The negative impacts on donor-recipient size mismatch on survival outcomes are confined to the first year post-LT. SFSD is associated with a slight decrease in 90-d survival rates. LFSD should be utilized more frequently by minimizing cold ischemia time to <8 h, particularly in patients with MELD 3.0 scores below 35. These findings could improve donor-recipient matching and enhance LT outcomes.

A retrospective study investigating the risk of graft loss in living donor liver transplant cases where size mismatching is predicted from graft-to-recipient weight ratio

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is vital for pediatric end-stage liver disease due to organ shortages. The graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) preoperatively measured predicts the outcomes of LDLT. We typically target between 0.8 and 3.0-4.0%, but the ideal GRWR remains controversial. We compared the outcomes of LDLT according to the GRWR to examine whether the criteria could be expanded while ensuring safety.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 99 patients who underwent LDLT in our department by dividing them into three groups according to their GRWR: Group S, with GRWR values lower than the normal range (GRWR < 0.8%); Group M, with GRWR values in the normal range (GRWR ≥ 0.8 to < 3.5%); and Group L, with GRWR values above the normal range (GRWR ≥ 3.5%).

RESULTS

In Groups S and L, 46.2 and 44.4% of patients underwent splenectomy and delayed abdominal wall closure, respectively. After these intraoperative adjustments, there were no significant differences between the groups in 5-year patient survival, 5-year graft survival, or the occurrence of post-transplantation thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

When the GRWR is beyond the normal threshold, the risk of complications associated with graft size might be reduced by adjustments to provide appropriate portal blood flow and by delayed abdominal wall closure.

Advocating for a "shift-to-left" in transplant oncology: left grafts, RAPID and dual graft

The extension of liver transplantation to new oncologic indications might exacerbate the shortage of grafts. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) may emerge as a viable resource, although its diffusion in the Western world is still very limited. Several groups have advocated for minimizing the impact on donors by reducing the extent of donor hepatectomy, i.e., shifting from right-lobe to left-lobe or left-lateral segment donation ("shift-to-left"). This is particularly relevant when dealing with non-established indications and could make it more acceptable both for potential donors and for the recipients. Left grafts can be transplanted straightforward, despite a higher risk of small-for-size syndrome, or they can be used in the setting of dual-graft LDLT or RAPID procedures, despite technical complexity. This review will expose the most relevant features of each technique, highlighting their strengths and pitfalls and focusing on outcomes. This wide set of tools should be available at high-volume transplant centers, to propose the best technique to adapt to donor-recipient matching.

Reappraisal of Donor Age in Liver Transplantation: NASH as a Potential Target to Safely Utilize Old Liver Grafts

BACKGROUND

With the chronic shortage of donated organs, expanding the indications for liver transplantation (LT) from older donors is critical. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) stands out because of its unique systemic pathogenesis and high recurrence rate, both of which might make donor selection less decisive. The present study aims to investigate the usefulness of old donors in LT for NASH patients.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Scientific Registry Transplant Recipient database. The cohort was divided into 3 categories according to donor age: young (aged 16-35), middle-aged (36-59), and old donors (60-). Multivariable and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to compare the risk of donor age on graft survival (GS).

RESULTS

A total of 67 973 primary adult donation-after-brain-death LTs (2002-2016) were eligible for analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a reduced impact of donor age on GS for the NASH cohort (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.27), comparing old to middle-aged donors. If the cohort was limited to NASH recipients plus 1 of the following, recipient age ≥60, body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30, adjusted hazard ratios were even smaller (0.99 [0.84-1.15], 0.92 [0.75-1.13], or 1.04 [0.91-1.19], respectively). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant differences in overall GS between old- and middle-aged donors in these subgroups ( P = 0.86, 0.28, and 0.11, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor age was less influential for overall GS in NASH cohort. Remarkably, old donors were equivalent to middle-aged donors in subgroups of recipient age ≥60, recipient body mass index <30, or Model of End Stage Liver Disease score <30.

Outcomes and Risk Factors for Liver Transplantation Using Graft-to-Recipient Weight Ratio Less Than 0.8 Graft From Living Donors: Multicentric Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare graft survival after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients receiving graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) <0.8 versus GRWR≥0.8 grafts and identify risk factors for graft loss using GRWR<0.8 grafts.

BACKGROUND

Favorable outcomes after LDLT using GRWR<0.8 grafts were recently reported; however, these results have not been validated using multicenter data.

METHODS

This multicentric cohort study included 3450 LDLT patients. Graft survival was compared between 1:3 propensity score-matched groups and evaluated using various Cox models in the entire population. Risk factors for graft loss with GRWR<0.8 versus GRWR≥0.8 grafts were explored within various subgroups using interaction analyses, and outcomes were stratified according to the number of risk factors.

RESULTS

In total, 368 patients (10.7%) received GRWR<0.8 grafts (GRWR<0.8 group), whereas 3082 (89.3%) received GRWR≥0.8 grafts (GRWR≥0.8 group). The 5-year graft survival rate was significantly lower with GRWR<0.8 grafts than with GRWR≥0.8 grafts (85.2% vs 90.1%, P =0.013). Adjusted hazard ratio for graft loss using GRWR<0.8 grafts in the entire population was 1.66 (95% CI: 1.17-2.35, P =0.004). Risk factors exhibiting significant interactions with GRWR<0.8 for graft survival were age ≥60 years, Model for End-stage Liver Disease score ≥15, and male donor. When ≥2 risk factors were present, GRWR<0.8 grafts showed a higher risk of graft loss compared with GRWR≥0.8 graft in LDLT (hazard ratio 2.98, 95% CI: 1.79-4.88, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

GRWR<0.8 graft showed inferior graft survival than controls (85.2% vs 90.1%), especially when ≥2 risk factors for graft loss (among age 60 years or above, Model for End-stage Liver Disease score ≥15, or male donor) were present.

Impact of thoracic shape on the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted living donor hepatectomy

Background

Although laparoscopic-assisted donor hepatectomy (LADH) has become the definitive procedure for harvesting living donor livers, its surgical outcomes in association with donor body shape have not been elucidated.

Methods

The impact of donor factors, including thoracic shape, on LADH outcomes was retrospectively investigated. Thoracic anthropometric data were examined in all LADHs with a left/right graft between 2013 and 2022.

Results

The study included 210 LADHs, consisting of 106 left- and 104 right-lobe donors with similar blood loss and similar operation time. Males have greater thoracic depth and greater thoracic width compared with females, respectively. Thoracic depth was associated with graft weight (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), and operation time (p < 0.001). On multivariate analyses, blood loss >500 mL and operation time >8 h were associated with graft weight in the left-lobe donors, and blood loss >500 mL was associated with thoracic depth in the right-lobe donors.

Conclusion

The greater thoracic depth is associated with massive blood loss in right-lobe donors. Anthropometric parameters might be helpful for estimating LADH outcomes.

Outcomes of living donor liver transplant recipients receiving grafts with the graft-to-recipient weight ratio less than 0.6%: A matched pair analysis

We sometimes experience living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) involving very small grafts with graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) < 0.6% when the actual graft size is smaller than predicted. The outcomes in this situation have not been fully investigated. The present study aimed to determine the graft outcomes of LDLT with GRWR < 0.6%. We retrospectively reviewed 280 cases of adult LDLT performed at our institution between January 2000 and March 2021. In our institution, the lower limit for graft volume/standard liver volume ratio was 30%. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the cutoff value of 0.6% for actual GRWR. Graft survival and surgical outcomes, including small-for-size syndrome (SFSS), were compared between the groups using propensity score matching analysis. Risk factors associated with SFSS in recipients with GRWR < 0.6% were also evaluated. Fifty-nine patients received grafts with GRWR < 0.6%. After propensity score matching, similar graft survival rates were observed for GRWR < 0.6% (n = 53) and GRWR ≥ 0.6% (n = 53) ( p = 0.98). However, patients with GRWR < 0.6% had a significantly worse 3-month graft survival rate (86.8% vs. 98.1%, p = 0.03) and higher incidence of SFSS ( p < 0.001) than patients with GRWR ≥0.6%. On multivariate analysis, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score and donor age were associated with SFSS in patients with GRWR < 0.6%. The same factors were also associated with graft survival. In conclusion, although similar overall graft survival rates were observed for LDLT with GRWR < 0.6% and GRWR ≥ 0.6%, GRWR < 0.6% was associated with an increased risk of SFSS. Appropriate donor and recipient selection is important for successful LDLT with very small grafts.

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Size Matching Deceased Donor Livers: The Tampa General Measurement System

BACKGROUND

No reliable or standardized system exists for measuring the size of deceased donor livers to determine whether they will fit appropriately into intended recipients.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center study evaluated the efficacy of Tampa General Hospital's size-matching protocol for consecutive, deceased donor liver transplantations between October 2021 and November 2022. Our protocol uses cross-sectional imaging at the time of organ offer to compare the donor's right hepatic lobe size with the recipient's right hepatic fossa. Outcomes were analyzed, including large-for-size syndrome, small-for-size syndrome, early allograft dysfunction, primary nonfunction, graft survival, and patient survival.

RESULTS

We included 171 patients in the study. The donor liver physically fit in all the patients except one whose pretransplant imaging was outdated. One patient (0.6%) had large-for-size syndrome, none had small-for-size syndrome, 15 (10%) had early allograft dysfunction, and none had primary nonfunction. There were 11 (7%) patient deaths and 11 (7%) graft failures.

CONCLUSION

Our measurement system is fast and effective. It reliably predicts whether the donor liver will fit in the intended recipient and is associated with low rates of early allograft dysfunction.

Effects of Adding Congested Segment IV to the Left Lateral Graft on Short-term Outcomes in Pediatric Living-donor Liver-transplant Recipients

Background

In some pediatric patients undergoing living-donor liver transplantation, segment IV without the middle hepatic vein can be added to a left lateral segment graft to obtain larger graft volume. Because no clear consensus on this technique exists, this study investigated the effects of congested areas on postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients with biliary atresia undergoing living-donor liver transplantation.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data of recipients with biliary atresia aged ≤15 y who had undergone living-donor liver transplantation at Kyoto University Hospital between 2006 and 2021 and with graft-to-recipient weight ratios (GRWR) of ≤2%. Based on the percentage of congested area in the graft, patients were classified into the noncongestion (n = 40; ≤10%) and congestion (n = 13; >10%) groups. To compare the differences between groups with similar nooncongestive GRWRs and investigate the effect of adding congested areas, patients in the noncongestion group with GRWRs of ≤1.5% were categorized into the small noncongestion group (n = 24).

Results

GRWRs and backgrounds were similar between the noncongestion and congestion groups; however, patients in the congestion group demonstrated significantly longer prothrombin times, higher ascites volumes, and longer hospitalization. Further, compared with the small noncongestion group, the congestion group had significantly greater GRWR and similar noncongestive GRWR; however, the congestion group had significantly longer prothrombin time recovery (P = 0.020, postoperative d 14), higher volume of ascites (P < 0.05, consistently), and longer hospitalization (P = 0.045), requiring significantly higher albumin and gamma-globulin transfusion volumes than the small noncongestion group (P = 0.027 and P = 0.0083, respectively). Reoperation for wound dehiscence was significantly more frequent in the congestion group (P = 0.048).

Conclusions

In pediatric liver-transplant recipients, adding a congested segment IV to the left lateral segment to obtain larger graft volume may negatively impact short-term postoperative outcomes.

Preventing Small-for-size Syndrome in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Guidelines From the ILTS-iLDLT-LTSI Consensus Conference

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is a well-recognized complication following liver transplantation (LT), with up to 20% developing this following living donor LT (LDLT). Preventing SFSS involves consideration of factors before the surgical procedure, including donor and recipient selection, and factors during the surgical procedure, including adequate outflow reconstruction, graft portal inflow modulation, and management of portosystemic shunts. International Liver Transplantation Society, International Living Donor Liver Transplantation Group, and Liver Transplant Society of India Consensus Conference was convened in January 2023 to develop recommendations for the prediction and management of SFSS in LDLT. The format of the conference was based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. International experts in this field were allocated to 4 working groups (diagnosis, prevention, anesthesia, and critical care considerations, and management of established SFSS). The working groups prepared evidence-based recommendations to answer-specific questions considering the currently available literature. The working group members, independent panel, and conference attendees served as jury to edit and confirm the final recommendations presented at the end of the conference by each working group separately. This report presents the final statements and evidence-based recommendations provided by working group 2 that can be implemented to prevent SFSS in LDLT patients.

Post Living Donor Liver Transplantation Small-for-size Syndrome: Definitions, Timelines, Biochemical, and Clinical Factors for Diagnosis: Guidelines From the ILTS-iLDLT-LTSI Consensus Conference

BACKGROUND

When a partial liver graft is unable to meet the demands of the recipient, a clinical phenomenon, small-for-size syndrome (SFSS), may ensue. Clear definition, diagnosis, and management are needed to optimize transplant outcomes.

METHODS

A Consensus Scientific committee (106 members from 21 countries) performed an extensive literature review on specific aspects of SFSS, recommendations underwent blinded review by an independent panel, and discussion/voting on the recommendations occurred at the Consensus Conference.

RESULTS

The ideal graft-to-recipient weight ratio of ≥0.8% (or graft volume standard liver volume ratio of ≥40%) is recommended. It is also recommended to measure portal pressure or portal blood flow during living donor liver transplantation and maintain a postreperfusion portal pressure of <15 mm Hg and/or portal blood flow of <250 mL/min/100 g graft weight to optimize outcomes. The typical time point to diagnose SFSS is the postoperative day 7 to facilitate treatment and intervention. An objective 3-grade stratification of severity for protocolized management of SFSS is proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed grading system based on clinical and biochemical factors will help clinicians in the early identification of patients at risk of developing SFSS and institute timely therapeutic measures. The validity of this newly created grading system should be evaluated in future prospective studies.

Early allograft dysfunction after living donor liver transplantation-current concepts and future directions

Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) after liver transplantation is a significant clinical problem that negatively impacts graft and patient outcomes. The rising incidence of EAD and what it means concerning living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an area of great interest. However, EAD after LDLT is a complex research topic yet to be reviewed comprehensively. Most of the literature on EAD is based on experience in deceased donor liver transplantation, and limited information is available in the context of LDLT. Thus, in this review, we present an overview of EAD after LDLT and have attempted to present balanced points of view on all its aspects, such as definitions, pathogenesis, risk factors, predictive markers, and management. The review aims to broadly overview the nature and extent of ongoing research evidence on this complex topic and inform practice in the field by identifying key concepts and knowledge gaps and highlighting areas that require further inquiry.

Auxiliary Partial Orthotopic Liver Transplant as a Rescue Procedure for Acute Liver Failure with Extra-Small-for-Size Grafts: A Report of 2 Cases

Auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant is a complex technique whereby a partial liver graft is transplanted in the orthotopic position, leaving behind a portion of the native liver. In acute liver failure, auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant serves as a rescue therapy and bridge for the native liver to regenerate. Auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant was initially considered a technically challenging procedure with inferior results versus orthotopic liver transplant. However, advancements in surgical techniques have led to improved results with auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant. Auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant is now increasingly accepted as a valid treatment option for acute liver failure. We present 2 cases of acute liver failure treated with auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant using an extra-small-for-size graft. The first case was a 12-year-old female patient who presented with druginduced acute liver failure and required an auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant with an extra-small left lobe graft (graft-to-recipient weight ratio of 0.45). The second case was a 23-year-old male patient with acute liver failure of unknown etiology who underwent an auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant with a small right lobe graft (graft-torecipient weight ratio of 0.5). In both cases, computed tomography liver volumetry was performed to determine the appropriate graft size for the recipient. Both patients underwent successful auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplants, with good postoperative recovery. Follow-up examinations showed satisfactory liver function without evidence of graft failure or rejection. Auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplant using extra-small grafts can be an effective treatment option for acute liver failure when no other suitable option exists, including as a rescue procedure for small grafts. However, careful patient selection and surgical planning are essential to ensure successful outcomes.

Association between Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence and Graft Size in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review

The aim of this work was to assess the association between graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence. A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed until December 2022 for studies comparing different GRWRs in the prognosis of HCC recipients in LDLT. Data were pooled to evaluate 1- and 3-year survival rates. We identified three studies, including a total of 782 patients (168 GRWR < 0.8 vs. 614 GRWR ≥ 0.8%). The pooled overall survival was 85% and 77% at one year and 90% and 83% at three years for GRWR < 0.8 and GRWR ≥ 0.8, respectively. The largest series found that, in patients within Milan criteria, the GRWR was not associated with lower oncological outcomes. However, patients with HCC outside the Milan criteria with a GRWR < 0.8% had lower survival and higher tumor recurrence rates. The GRWR < 0.8% appears to be associated with lower survival rates in HCC recipients, particularly for candidates with tumors outside established HCC criteria. Although the data are scarce, the results of this study suggest that considering the individual GRWR not only as risk factor for small-for-size-syndrome but also as contributor to HCC recurrence in patients undergoing LDLT would be beneficial. Novel perfusion technologies and pharmacological interventions may contribute to improving outcomes.

Technical challenges in LDLT - Overcoming small for size syndrome and venous outflow reconstruction

Living Donor Liver Transplantation (LDLT) emerged as an alternative treatment option for patients with end-stage liver disease waiting for an organ from a deceased donor. In addition to allowing for a faster access to transplantation, LDLT provides improved recipient outcomes when compared to deceased donor LT. However, it represents a more complex and demanding procedure for the transplant surgeon. In addition to a comprehensive preoperative donor assessment and stringent technical considerations during the donor hepatectomy to ensure upmost donor safety, the recipient procedure also comes with intrinsic challenges during LDLT. A proper approach during both procedures will result in favorable donor and recipient's outcomes. Hence, it is critical for the transplant surgeon to know how to overcome such technical challenges and avoid deleterious complications. One of the most feared complications following LDLT is small-for-size syndrome (SFSS). Although, surgical advances and deeper understanding of the pathophysiology behind SFSS has allowed for a safer implementation of LDLT, there is currently no consensus on the best strategy to prevent or manage this complication. Therefore, we aim to review current practices in technically challenging situations during LDLT, with a particular focus on management of small grafts and venous outflow reconstructions, as they possess one of the biggest technical challenges faced during LDLT.

The short- and long-term outcomes in living-donor liver transplantation using small-for-size graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A standard graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) ≥0.8% is widely accepted in living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT); however, the potential donor pool is expanded to patients adopting small-for-size graft (SFSGs) with GRWR <0.8%. This study aimed to investigate the effect of SFSG on short- and long-term outcomes following LDLT.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from January 1995 to January 2022 for studies comparing short- or long-term outcomes between patients with SFSG (GRWR <0.8%, SFSG group) and sufficient volume graft (GRWR ≥0.8%, non-SFSG group). The primary outcomes were one-, three-, and five-year overall survival (OS) and graft survival (GS), while the secondary outcome was postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies comprising 7996 patients were included. In terms of OS, SFSG group had poor three-year OS (HR: 1.48, 95% CI [1.01, 2.15], p = 0.04), but there were no significant differences between two groups in one-year OS (HR: 1.50, 95% CI [0.98, 2.29], p = 0.06) and five-year OS (HR: 1.40, 95% CI [0.95, 2.08], p = 0.02). In GS, there were no significant differences in one-year (HR 1.31, 95% CI [1.00, 1.72], p = 0.05), three-year (HR 1.33, 95% CI [0.97, 1.82], p = 0.07), and five-year GS (HR 1.17, 95% CI [0.95, 1.44], p = 0.13). The SFSG group had comparable postoperative complications, except for a high incidence of vascular complications and small-for-size syndromes.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding the potential donor pool in LDLT to SFSG with GRWR <0.8% can be acceptable in terms of comparable long-term OS and GS, despite the risk for vascular complications and small-for-size syndrome.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation With Augmented Venous Outflow and Splenectomy: A Promised Land for Small Left Lobe Grafts

OBJECTIVE

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using small grafts, especially left lobe grafts (H1234-MHV) (LLG), continues to be a challenge due to small-for-size syndrome (SFSS). We herein demonstrate that with surgical modifications, outcomes with small grafts can be improved.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2020, we performed 130 adult LDLT using 61 (47%) LLG (H1234-MHV) in a single Enterprise. The median graft-to-recipient weight ratio was 0.84%, with graft-to-recipient weight ratio <0.7% accounting for 22%. Splenectomy was performed in 72 (56%) patients for inflow modulation before (n=50) or after (n=22) graft reperfusion. In LLG-LDLT, venous outflow was achieved using all three recipient hepatic veins. In right lobe graft (H5678) (RLG)-LDLT, the augmented graft right hepatic vein was anastomosed to the recipient's cava with a large cavotomy. Outcome measures include SFSS, early allograft dysfunction (EAD), and survival.

RESULTS

Graft survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 94%, 90%, and 83%, respectively, with no differences between LLG (H1234-MHV) and RLG (H5678). Splenectomy significantly reduced portal flow without increasing the complication rate. Despite the aggressive use of small grafts, SFSS and EAD developed in only 1 (0.8%) and 18 (13.8%) patients, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression revealed model for end-stage liver disease score and LLG (H1234-MHV) as independent risk factors for EAD and splenectomy as a protective factor (odds ratio: 0.09; P =0.03). For LLG (H1234-MHV)-LDLT, patients who underwent prereperfusion splenectomy tended to have better 1-year graft survival than those receiving postreperfusion splenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

LLG (H1234-MHV) are feasible in adult LDLT with excellent outcomes comparable to RLG (H5678). Venous outflow augmentation and splenectomy help lower the threshold of using small-for-size grafts without compromising graft survival.

HPi: A Novel Parameter to Predict Graft-related Outcome in Adult Living Donor Liver Transplant

BACKGROUND

Portal hyperperfusion is frequently associated with early allograft dysfunction (EAD). It is imperative to identify patients who would require portal inflow modulation. We aimed to identify factors associated with hyperperfusion-related graft injury and develop a predictive index for the same.

METHODS

Prospectively maintained database was queried to identify 135 adult living donor liver transplant recipients between September 2016 and July 2020. According to the calculated sample size, 96 patients were randomly selected for "test cohort". The remaining 39 patients made the "validation cohort." EAD was defined according to the A2ALL study. "Hyperperfusion index (HPi)," defined as posttransplant portal pressure gradient (ΔPpost)/graft-to-recipient splenic volume ratio (GRSVR), was devised on the basis of laws of flow dynamics and regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 40 patients (29.6%) had EAD, six 90-d mortalities (4.4%) were attributable to EAD. In the test cohort, EAD patients (n = 29, 30.2%) had lower GRSVR (1.00 versus 2.22, P < 0.001), higher ΔPpost (14.8 versus 11.9, P = 0.004), and HPi (20.89 versus 8.67, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed GRSVR, ΔPpost, and HPi as significant factors to predict EAD. Receiver operating characteristic determined cutoff of HPi ≥9.97 could predict EAD with sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 73% (F-score = 0.712). HPi ≥16.25 predicted 90-d mortality with sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 78.9%. Patients with higher HPi had delayed graft-related recovery. Non-EAD patients had a higher 1-y (96% versus 79%) and 2-y (88% versus 79%) survival. The cutoff of HPi was validated well in the validation cohort (F-score = 0.645) (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, P = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

While predicted GRSVR may help identify at-risk patients preoperatively, intraoperatively calculated HPi is more accurate in identifying patients who would require portal inflow modulation. Achieving an HPi below target cutoff significantly decreases the risk of EAD even in low-GRSVR patients.