Outcomes of patients with benign liver diseases undergoing living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation

Comparison of Biliary Complications Between Living and Deceased Donor Liver Transplantations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

To understand if the risk of biliary complications is higher with living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT), the present meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the differences between these two types of liver transplantations. Three databases were searched from inception to September 2023 for comparative studies reporting biliary complications with LDLT and DDLT. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all the dichotomous outcomes. Twenty-eight studies were included in the final analysis. LDLT was associated with a significantly higher incidence of biliary complications than DDLT (OR 1.96, 95% CI: 1.56-2.47). However, on subgroup analysis, only studies published in or before 2014 reported a higher incidence of biliary complications with LDLT, but not with studies published after 2014. An analysis of individual adverse events showed that LDLT was associated with a higher incidence of both bile leak (OR 3.38, 95% CI: 2.52-4.53) and biliary stricture (OR 1.75, 95% CI: 1.20-2.55). LDLT was associated with a higher incidence of overall biliary complications, including bile leak and biliary stricture. With advances in surgical techniques, there has been a reduction in the risk of biliary complications.

Post-liver transplant biliary complications

Biliary complications (BCs) are the most frequent complications following liver transplantation (LT). They are a major source of morbidity after LT. The incidence of BCs after LT is reported to range from 5% to 45%. The main post-LT biliary complications are strictures, biliary fistulas and bilomas, cholelithiasis, sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, hemobilia, and mucocele. Risk factors for biliary complications are diverse. In this article we seek to review the main types of biliary complications and modern approaches to their diagnosis and treatment.

Extended criteria donors for Robotic Right Hepatectomy- A Propensity Score matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic right donor hepatectomy (RDH) has been reported from experienced centers with reduced morbidity when compared to open RDH. However, outcomes in donors with large grafts/ complex biliovascular anatomy are unknown.

METHODS

Out of 170 robotic RDH, 100 had one or more of the following: graft weight ≥ 800gms, type 2/3 portal vein, >1 bile duct or hepatic artery and inferior hepatic veins >5mm requiring reconstruction (extended criteria donors- ExRDH), while the remaining 70 had standard anatomy (SRDH). After propensity score matching, 66 ExRDH were compared with 66 SRDH. Additionally, all robotic RDH performed were analysed in 3 temporal phases (60, 60 and 50).

RESULTS

Peak AST and ALT were higher among donors and recipients in the ExRDH arm compared to SRDH. Other intraoperative parameters and post-operative complications were similar between the two groups. During the last phase, donors demonstrated reduction in duration of surgery, postoperative complications and hospital stay while recipients showed decreased blood loss and hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Robotic right hepatectomy performed in donors with extended criteria have similar perioperative outcomes as standard donors. However, a significant learning curve needs to be traversed. Further studies are required before safely recommending robotic RDH for all donors.

Meta-analysis and meta-regression of outcomes for adult living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation

Prior single center or registry studies have shown that living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) decreases waitlist mortality and offers superior patient survival over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for adult LDLT and DDLT via systematic review. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine patient survival and graft survival, MELD, waiting time, technical complications, and postoperative infections. Out of 8600 abstracts, 19 international studies comparing adult LDLT and DDLT published between 1/2005 and 12/2017 were included. U.S. outcomes were analyzed using registry data. Overall, 4571 LDLT and 66,826 DDLT patients were examined. LDLT was associated with lower mortality at 1, 3, and 5 years posttransplant (5-year HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.81-0.93], p < .0001), similar graft survival, lower MELD at transplant (p < .04), shorter waiting time (p < .0001), and lower risk of rejection (p = .02), with a higher risk of biliary complications (OR 2.14, p < .0001). No differences were observed in rates of hepatic artery thrombosis. In meta-regression analysis, MELD difference was significantly associated with posttransplant survival (R2 0.56, p = .02). In conclusion, LDLT is associated with improved patient survival, less waiting time, and lower MELD at LT, despite posing a higher risk of biliary complications that did not affect survival posttransplant.

Increased Surgical Complications but Improved Overall Survival with Adult Living Donor Compared to Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) provides an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with end-stage liver disease in the circumstance of scarcity of deceased grafts. However, the outcomes of LDLT remain controversial.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of LDLT with DDLT. Twelve outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies involving 38563 patients were included. LDLT was comparable in red blood cell transfusion, perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, retransplantation rate, hepatitis C virus recurrence rate, and hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence rate with DDLT. Cold ischemia time was shorter and duration of recipient operation was longer in LDLT. Postoperative intra-abdominal bleeding rate occurred less frequently in LDLT recipients (odds ratio (OR) = 0.64, 95%confidence interval (CI) = 0.46 - 0.88, P = 0.006), but this did not decrease the perioperative mortality. LDLT was associated with significantly higher biliary (OR = 2.23, 95%CI = 1.59 - 3.13, P < 0.00001) and vascular (OR = 2.00, 95%CI = 1.31 - 3.07, P = 0.001) complication rates and better overall survival (OS) (1 year: OR = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.01 - 1.72, P = 0.04; 3 years: OR = 1.39, 95%CI = 1.14 - 1.69, P = 0.0010; and 5 years: OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.04 - 1.70, P = 0.02). According to subgroup analysis, biliary complication rate and OS improved dramatically as experience increased, while vascular complication rate could not be improved because it was mainly caused by the difference of the donor type itself.

CONCLUSIONS

LDLT remains a valuable option for patients in need of liver transplantation for it provides an excellent alternative to DDLT without compromising recipient outcomes. Further refinement in biliary and vascular reconstruction techniques and the accumulation of liver transplantation centers' experience are the key factors in expanding the application of LDLT.

Early reoperation after adult living-donor liver transplantation is associated with poor survival

Background

Patients who undergo reoperation after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have poor outcomes. However, the specific outcomes of patients undergoing reoperation due to gastrointestinal (GI) tract-related complications following adult LDLT are relatively unknown. In the present study, we investigated the relationship between the causes and outcomes of reoperation after LDLT and classified the risk groups.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of 506 patients who underwent LDLT at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul between 2010 and 2016.

Results

Among 506 adult LDLT recipients, 98 (19.4%) underwent reoperation. The causes for reoperation included bleeding (n=39, 39.8%), vascular complications (n=26, 26.5%), wound complications (n=12, 12.2%), bile leakage (n=7, 7.1%), GI tract complications (n=6, 6.1%), and others (n=8, 8.1%). Based on a multivariate analysis, we identified prolonged operation time, hospitalization days, and a history of previous hepatocellular carcinoma-related operation as independent risk factors for reoperation. Patient survival after 3 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years was 96.3%, 90.6%, 82.5%, and 79.4% in the non-reoperation group and 95.9%, 82.7%, 72.8% and 69.3% in the reoperation group, respectively. Patient survival in the reoperation group was significantly lower than that in the non-reoperation group (P=0.018). In the reoperation group, the survival rates of patients with GI tract-related complications—including bile leakage and GI tract complications—were significantly worse than those of patients with non-GI tract-related complications such as bleeding, vascular complications, and wound complications (P<0.001).

Conclusions

Our results showed that patient outcomes are poor after early reoperation after LDLT and that patients with GI tract-related complications have a higher risk of mortality.

The Causes and Outcomes of Early Relaparotomy Following Pediatric Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Early relaparotomy of adult recipients after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is significantly associated with poor prognosis. However, there are few reports focusing on pediatric recipients after LDLT. The aim of this study is to clarify the causes and outcomes of early relaparotomy after pediatric LDLT. A total of 265 pediatric recipients (272 LDLTs) transplanted from May 2001 to October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Early relaparotomy was defined as surgical intervention performed within 3 months after LDLT. Early relaparotomy was performed 49 times for 33 recipients (12.5%). The recipient and graft survival rates in the early relaparotomy group were significantly lower than those in the nonearly relaparotomy group, respectively (75.0% and 63.6% versus 96.6% and 95.8%; both P < 0.001). Left lateral segment grafts were used significantly more frequently in the nonrelaparotomy group (P = 0.01). According to the multivariate analysis, the preoperative Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (PELD)/Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of the early relaparotomy group was significantly higher than that of the nonearly relaparotomy group (13.7 versus 6.3; P = 0.04). According to the receiver operating characteristic curve, the preoperative PELD/MELD score cutoff point was 17.2. Early relaparotomy due to infectious causes led to significantly poorer graft survival than that due to noninfectious causes (P = 0.04). In conclusion, the recipient and graft survival rates of the early relaparotomy group were significantly lower than those of the nonearly relaparotomy group. A high preoperative PELD/MELD score was a risk factor for early relaparotomy. In particular, early relaparotomy due to infection showed a poor prognosis.

Hepatitis B and hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after living donor liver transplantation: The role of the Milan criteria

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the Milan criteria on the hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation due to HBV-induced cirrhosis and HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated a total of 142 patients, 88 who underwent transplantation due to HBV-induced cirrhosis and 54 due to HCC, between 2009 and 2014. In the posttranplant period, after the HBsAg seroconversion, 400 IU of hepatitis B immunoglobulin were applied intramuscularly every 2 weeks, and daily nucleos(t)ide analogs were continued as prophylaxis. The HBV recurrence was defined as the presence of HBsAg in serum. Patients were screened for alpha-fetoprotein levels and imaging for evaluation of HCC recurrence.

RESULTS

The average follow-up period was 26 (2-65) months. Fifty-four patients had HCC. The HCC recurrence was observed in 12 patients during the follow-up period. The HBV recurrence was observed in four patients. Three of the patients who developed HBV recurrence had liver transplantation due to HCC. Tumor recurrence was observed 1.4-12 months following the HBV recurrence. The HCC recurrence within the Milan criteria and beyond the Milan criteria was 0% vs. 28.4 % in the first year and 3.4% vs. 47.5% in the third year. The cumulative incidence of the HBV recurrence was 2.8% and 3.7% for the first year and 3.7% for the third year. The HBV recurrence was more frequently detected in patients with HCC (p=0.048), especially with HCC beyond the Milan criteria (p=0.044).

CONCLUSION

The HBV recurrence should be evaluated as a predictor of the HCC recurrence in patients who underwent liver transplantation due to HCC with exceeding Milan criteria.

Living Donation Versus Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation for Low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Recipients

In this era of organ scarcity, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to using deceased donors, and in Western countries, it is more often used for recipients with low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. We sought to compare the patient survival and graft survival between recipients of liver transplantation from living donors and donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors in patients with low MELD scores. This is a retrospective cohort analysis of adult liver transplant recipients with a laboratory MELD of ≤20 who underwent transplantation between January 1, 2003 and March 31, 2016. Recipients were categorized by donor graft type (DCD or LDLT), and recipient and donor characteristics were compared. Ten-year patient and graft survival curves were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analyses, and a mixed-effects model was performed to determine the contributions of recipient, donor, and center variables on patient and graft survival. There were 36,705 liver transplants performed: 32,255 (87.9%) from DBD donors, 2166 (5.9%) from DCD donors, and 2284 (6.2%) from living donors. In the mixed-effects model, DCD status was associated with a higher risk of graft failure (relative risk [RR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.38) but not worse patient survival (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.96-1.67). Lower DCD center experience was associated with a 1.21 higher risk of patient death (95% CI, 1.17-1.25) and a 1.13 higher risk of graft failure (95% CI, 1.12-1.15). LDLT center experience was also predictive of patient survival (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03) and graft failure (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.05-1.06). In conclusion, for liver transplant recipients with low laboratory MELD, LDLT offers better graft survival and a tendency to better patient survival than DCD donors.

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation preoperative survey using MDCT, a single medical center experience in Taiwan

This study evaluated multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) scans performed on potential living donors for adult-to-adult liver transplantation (LDLT), with the aim of identifying significant findings that could be used to exclude potential transplantation donors. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 151 consecutive potential adult donors for LDLT from May 2007 to January 2015. Liver parenchyma steatosis, focal hepatic mass or intraabdominal malignancy, vascular variations, and donor liver volume were evaluated via MDCT. Grounds for excluding potential donors were also recorded and analyzed. Of the 151 potential donors, nine (6.0%) had moderate to severe fatty liver, 37 (24.5%) had hepatic arterial variants, 22 (14.6%) had significant portal venous variants, and more than half were found to have right accessory inferior hepatic vein. No intraabdominal malignancies were found. Eighty-eight potential donors were rejected, with the most common cause being insufficient recipient volume or remnant donor volume (47.7%), moderate to severe parenchymal steatosis (10.2%), and recipient expiration prior to transplantation (8.0%). An additional 16 potential donors were excluded by the surgical team due to the complexity of their portal venous variations. The rate of exclusion by pre-transplant imaging evaluation with MDCT was 33.8%. MDCT can provide accurate quantification of donor liver volume and steatosis severity along with precise demonstration of vascular variants, which are crucial for the preoperative evaluation of LDLT. However, MDCT may be ineffective for evaluating the biliary system without hepatobiliary-excreted contrast agent and has the disadvantage of ionizing radiation.

Arterial and biliary complications after living donor liver transplantation: a single-center retrospective study and literature review

AIM

The mortality of patients on the waiting list for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is high, especially in countries where donation rates are low. Thus, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an attractive option. However, compared with DDLT, LDLT is associated with increased rates of arterial and biliary complications. We examined the rates of complications and risk factors following LDLT.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated and compared the rates of complications of DDLT and LDLT in our institute. We also performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify the independent risk factors for these complications. The complications and specific disadvantages of LDLT were reviewed and discussed.

RESULTS

The incidence rate of arterial complications in LDLT was 6.0%, compared with 3.2% (13/441) in DDLT. A multivariate analysis identified low body weight (P = 0.032) as the only independent risk factor for hepatic artery thrombosis. The rate of all biliary complications in LDLT was 17.3%, compared with 18.7% in DDLT. The risk factors for biliary stricture identified by the multivariate analysis were recurrent cholangitis and the number of bile ducts. The durations of hospital stay and overall survival rates were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Given the shortage of deceased donor organs, we believe that LDLT is acceptable in an attempt to meet demand.

Relationship Between Bile Duct Reconstruction and Complications in Living Donor Liver Transplantation

OBJECTIVES

In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the recipient bile duct is thin and short. Bile duct complications often occur in LDLT, with persistent long-term adverse effects. Recently, we began to perform microsurgical reconstruction of the bile duct. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between bile duct reconstruction methods and complications in LDLT.

METHODS

From 1991 to 2014, we performed 161 LDLTs (pediatric:adult = 90:71; left lobe:right lobe = 95:66). In this study, we retrospectively investigated the initial bile duct complications in LDLT and performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify the independent risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

The most frequent complication was biliary stricture (9.9%), followed by biliary leakage (6.8%). On univariate and multiple logistic regression analysis, the independent risk factors for biliary stricture were bile leakage (P = .0103) and recurrent cholangitis (P = .0077). However, there were no risk factors for biliary leakage on univariate analysis in our study. The reconstruction methods (hepaticojejunostomy or duct-to-duct anastomosis) and reconstruction technique (with or without microsurgery) were not risk factors for biliary stricture and leakage.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the most frequent complication of LDLT was biliary stricture. The independent risk factors for biliary stricture were biliary leakage and recurrent cholangitis. Duct-to-duct anastomosis and microsurgical reconstruction of the bile duct were not risk factors for biliary stricture and leakage.

Analysis of early relaparotomy following living donor liver transplantation

We retrospectively analyzed the causes, risk factors, and impact of early relaparotomy after adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) on the posttransplant outcome. Adult recipients who underwent initial LDLT at our institution between August 1997 and August 2015 (n = 196) were included. Any patients who required early retransplantation were excluded. Early relaparotomy was defined as surgical treatment within 30 days after LDLT. Relaparotomy was performed 66 times in 52 recipients (a maximum of 4 times in 1 patient). The reasons for relaparotomy comprised postoperative bleeding (39.4%), vascular complications (27.3%), suspicion of abdominal sepsis or bile leakage (25.8%), and others (7.6%). A multivariate analysis revealed that previous upper abdominal surgery and prolonged operative time were independent risk factors for early relaparotomy. The overall survival rate in the relaparotomy group was worse than that in the nonrelaparotomy group (6 months, 67.3% versus 90.1%, P < 0.001; 1 year, 67.3% versus 88.6%, P < 0.001; and 5 years, 62.6% versus 70.6%, P = 0.06). The outcome of patients who underwent 2 or more relaparotomies was worse compared with patients who underwent only 1 relaparotomy. In a subgroup analysis according to the cause of initial relaparotomy, the survival rate of the postoperative bleeding group was comparable with the nonrelaparotomy group (P = 0.96). On the other hand, the survival rate of the vascular complication group was significantly worse than that of the nonrelaparotomy group (P = 0.001). Previous upper abdominal surgery is a risk factor for early relaparotomy after LDLT. A favorable longterm outcome is expected in patients who undergo early relaparotomy due to postoperative bleeding. Liver Transplantation 22 1519-1525 2016 AASLD.

Comparing 10-yr renal outcomes in deceased donor and living donor liver transplants

Few studies have explored whether the type of LT, deceased donor LT (DDLT) or living donor LT (LDLT), impacts long-term renal outcomes. We performed a retrospective analysis of 220 LT recipients at our institution to study their renal outcomes at 10 yr. Exclusion criteria were age ≤ 18 yr, graft survival ≤ 6 months, and multiorgan transplants; 108 DDLTs and 62 LDLTs were eligible. At baseline, DDLTs had a lower eGFR than LDLTs and 10.2% of DDLTs were on dialysis as compared to 0% of LDLTs. At 10 yr, seven DDLT and three LDLT recipients required dialysis or renal transplant (p = 0.75). In recipients with graft survival >6 months, DDLTs had a slower decline in eGFR as compared to LDLTs (p < 0.01). Among LDLTs, the decline in eGFR continued over the entire 10-yr period, whereas among DDLTs, the decline in eGFR slowed significantly after six months (p = 0.01). This difference between the two groups was not seen among patients in the highest quartile of baseline eGFR. Patient survival and graft survival were similar. In conclusion, the incidence of end-stage renal disease was similar in both DDLT and LDLT patients, but LDLT recipients seem to have a more sustained decline in eGFR when compared with DDLT recipients.

Can living donor liver transplantation offer similar outcomes to deceased donor liver transplantation using expanded selection criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in different selection criteria.

METHODS

Data of patients with HCC who underwent liver transplantation between 2005 and 2013 at our center were reviewed. Clinical data of LDLT recipients and DDLT recipients were compared. The postoperative recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate after LDLT versus DDLT were compared in the Milan recipients, the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) recipients, the up-to-seven recipients, the Hangzhou recipients and the Chengdu recipients.

RESULTS

Data of 255 patients were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Seventeen DDLT recipient and 9 LDLT recipients died during the perioperative period. Among the remaining 229 recipients (NLDLT=66, NDDLT=163), 96 patients met the Milan criteria, 123 recipients met the UCSF criteria, 135 patients met the up-to-seven criteria, 216 patients met the Hangzhou criteria, and 229 recipients met the Chengdu criteria. The overall RFS and OS rates of the Milan recipients, the UCSF recipients, the up-to-seven recipients, the Hangzhou recipients and the Chengdu recipients after LDLT and DDLT were all similar.

CONCLUSION

Using well-studied selection criteria, LDLT offers similar outcomes to DDLT for patient with HCC, even using expanded selection criteria.

Improving Research Practice in Rat Orthotopic and Partial Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: A Review, Recommendation, and Publication Guide

Background: Due to a worldwide shortage of donor organs for liver transplantation, alternative approaches, such as split and living donor liver transplantations, were introduced to increase the donor pool and reduce mortality on liver transplant waiting lists. Numerous details concerning the mechanisms and pathophysiology of liver regeneration, small-for-size syndrome, rejection, and tolerance in partial liver transplantation facilitated the development of various animal models. The high number of preclinical animal studies contributed enormously to our understanding of many clinical aspects of living donor and partial liver transplantations. Summary: Microsurgical rat models of partial orthotopic liver transplantation are well established and widely used. Nevertheless, several issues regarding this procedure are controversial, not clarified, or not yet properly standardized (graft rearterialization, size reduction techniques, etc.). The major aim of this literature review is to give the reader a current overview of rat orthotopic liver transplantation models with a special focus on partial liver transplantation. The aspects of model evolution, microsurgical training, and different technical problems are analyzed and discussed in detail. Our further aim in this paper is to elaborate a detailed publication guide in order to improve the quality of reporting in the field of rat liver transplantation according to the ARRIVE guidelines and the 3R principle. Key Messages: Partial orthotopic liver transplantation in rats is an indispensable, reliable, and cost-efficient model for transplantation research. A certain consensus on different technical issues and a significant improvement in scientific reporting are essential to improve transparency and comparability in this field as well as to foster refinement.

Factors associated with early mortality after living-donor liver transplant

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify the risk factors associated with the early mortality after a living-donor liver transplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred eighteen patients were recruited in this study. Potential risk factors were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. A C statistic equivalent to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to assess the ability of the model to predict mortality risk during the first 3 months after a living-donor liver transplant.

RESULTS

Twenty-six recipients died within the first 3 months after a living-donor liver transplant. On a multivariate analysis, intraoperative allogeneic red blood cell transfusion and the preoperative creatinine levels were independently associated with early postoperative mortality. A prognostic model was proposed in this study (early mortality risk score = 0.107 × intraoperative allogeneic red blood cells transfusion [U] + 0.005 × preoperative creatinine concentration [μmol/L]). Three-month survival rates of patients with high and low scores were 69.8% and 95.5% (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Transfusion of intraoperative allogeneic red blood cell and preoperative creatinine levels are associated with the early mortality after living-donor liver transplant. A model to predict early mortality after a living-donor liver transplant based on these risk factors was proposed in this study.

Living donor liver transplantation does not increase tumor recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma compared to deceased donor transplantation

AIM: To compare the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-positive hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT).

METHODS: We retrospectively collected clinical data from 408 liver cancer patients from February 1999 to September 2012. We used the chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test to analyze the characteristics of LDLT and DDLT. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare the RFS and OS in HCC.

RESULTS: Three hundred sixty HBV-positive patients (276 DDLT and 84 LDLT) were included in this study. The mean follow-up time was 27.1 mo (range 1.1-130.8 mo). One hundred eighty-five (51.2%) patients died during follow-up. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS rates for LDLT were 85.2%, 55.7%, and 52.9%, respectively; for DDLT, the RFS rates were 73.2%, 49.1%, and 45.3% (P = 0.115). The OS rates were similar between the LDLT and DDLT recipients, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of 81.8%, 49.5%, and 43.0% vs 69.5%, 43.0%, and 38.3%, respectively (P = 0.30). The outcomes of HCC according to the Milan criteria after LDLT and DDLT were not significantly different (for LDLT: 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS: 94.7%, 78.7%, and 78.7% vs 89.2%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, P = 0.50; for DDLT: 86.1%, 68.8%, and 68.8% vs 80.5%, 62.2%, and 59.8% P = 0.53).

CONCLUSION: The outcomes of LDLT for HCC are not worse compared to the outcomes of DDLT. LDLT does not increase tumor recurrence of HCC compared to DDLT.

Operative outcomes of adult living donor liver transplantation and deceased donor liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has emerged as an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) because of the increasing number of patients waiting for liver transplantation (LT). However, whether it can achieve operative outcomes similar to those achieved with DDLT for adult patients remains controversial. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the operative outcomes of LDLT and DDLT recipients. A literature search was performed to identify clinical controlled studies comparing LDLT and DDLT that were published before October 2013. Four perioperative outcomes [duration of the recipient operation (DRO), red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirement, length of the hospital stay, and cold ischemia time (CIT)] and 5 postoperative complication outcomes (biliary complications, vascular complications, intra-abdominal bleeding, perioperative death, and retransplantation) were the main outcomes assessed. Nineteen studies with a total of 5450 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In comparison with DDLT, LDLT was associated with a significantly longer DRO and a shorter CIT. We found that biliary complications [odds ratio (OR) = 3.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.97-4.81, P < 0.001], vascular complications (OR = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.32-3.54, P = 0.002), and retransplantation (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.09-2.83, P = 0.02) occurred more frequently for LDLT recipients, and the subgroup analysis indicated that the biliary complication rate decreased dramatically with greater LDLT experience. No significant difference was observed in RBC transfusion requirements, the lengths of hospital stays, intra-abdominal bleeding rates, or perioperative mortality between LDLT and DDLT recipients. In conclusion, LDLT is associated with a higher rate of surgical complications after transplantation. A reduction of postoperative complication rates can be achieved as centers gain greater experience with LDLT. However, LDLT is still an excellent alternative to DDLT because it facilitates access to LT.

Cytokine concentrations and regulatory T cells in living donor and deceased donor liver transplant recipients

Outcomes of pediatric liver transplantation have constantly improved in the last decade. Living-related liver transplantation does not seem to improve long-term outcomes following liver transplantation, but few studies have evaluated immunological parameters of the alloimmune response after living vs. deceased donor organ transplantation. We analyzed numbers of regulatory T cells, lymphocyte subsets, and serum cytokine concentrations in 12 pediatric recipients of living-related liver transplants and in 28 pediatric recipients of deceased donor organs during their annual follow-ups. Transplant recipients who underwent living donor organ transplantation had significantly higher numbers of regulatory T cells and IL-4 serum concentrations than recipients of deceased donor organs; both of these factors are associated with beneficial outcomes and transplantation tolerance. Living-related liver transplantation may have potentially beneficial immunological aspects, although long-term outcomes do not seem to be better in recipients of living donor organs than in recipients of deceased donor organs. Further studies are needed to compare immunological aspects of the two transplant procedures.

Severe hepatic necrosis of unknown causes following ABO-incompatible liver transplantation

Emergency ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) liver transplantations (LTx) have been performed increasingly to treat severe liver failure. Herein, we report a case of severe hepatic necrosis after ABO-I LTx. A 53-year-old man with blood group O was diagnosed as having severe hepatitis B and acute-on-chronic liver failure, and underwent an emergency liver transplantation implanting a blood-group-B liver from a cardiac-death donor. A routine anti-rejection, anti-infection and anti-virus therapy was given after operation. On post-operative day (POD) 16, the recipient had fever and erythra. Laboratory and radiographic examinations suggested a severe hepatic necrosis of unknown causes. The patient was managed with a 10-d methylprednisolone pulse therapy. He was discharged on POD 35 with stable condition, and no recurrent disease was found during the follow-up.

The causes, risk factors, and outcomes of early relaparotomy after living-donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Although early relaparotomy of the recipient after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a significant event, its causes, risk factors, and outcomes are still unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 284 cases of adult-to-adult LDLT was performed.

RESULTS

The incidence of early relaparotomy of the recipient was 9.2% (n=26). The reasons for relaparotomy were divided into three groups: postoperative bleeding (n=11, 42.3%), insufficient portal venous flow (n=5, 19.2%), and other (n=10, 38.5%). The 6-month graft survival rates of patients in the early laparotomy and nonlaparotomy groups were 61.5% and 88.4%, respectively (P<0.0001). Patients with postoperative bleeding experienced a significantly higher mortality rate (54.6%) than those with other reasons for early relaparotomy (13.3%; P=0.0231). Multivariate analysis showed that a model for end-stage liver disease score of greater than 20 (odds ratio [OR], 9.06; P=0.0434) and an operative blood loss of greater than 15 L (OR, 9.06; P=0.0434) were significant risk factors for graft loss after early relaparotomy. In patients with patent major shunt vessels (>1 cm in diameter, n=31), portal venous flow of less than 1.0 L/min at the end of surgery was a significant risk factor for early relaparotomy to ligate the remaining shunt vessels (OR, 50.5; P=0.0188).

CONCLUSIONS

Early relaparotomy of the recipient is significantly associated with poor graft survival after LDLT. Massive intraoperative blood loss and high model for end-stage liver disease score were associated with poor graft survival in the relaparotomy group.

Living related donor liver transplantation in Iranian children: a 12- year experience

AIM

The aim of this study was to describe our results and investigate the survival of below-18-year-old patients undergoing LRDLT and the factors affecting this.

BACKGROUND

Living Related Donor Liver Transplantation (LRDLT) has become a good option to provide suitable grafts for children with liver diseases. Using this method, children who have no chance for life can live a much longer life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The present study is a historical cohort study carried on 191 patients below-18-year-sold who had undergone LRDLT for the first time in the Namazi hospital liver transplantation center. Survival rate of the patients was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. The effect of factors related to the recipients, donors, and the transplantation process on the patients' survival was also investigated.

RESULTS

1, 3, 5 and 11-year survival of patients was 71%, 66%, 65%, and 65%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, age, weight at transplantation, PELD/MELD score, existence of post-transplant complications were found to be effective factors on the patients' survival. In the multivariate analysis, weight at transplantation, PELD/MELD score, and existence of post-transplant complications were the prognostic variables.

CONCLUSION

LRDLT is now well established with satisfactory results in our center. Although the survival rate of the patients is lower than the survival rate reported in other studies, but the survival of the patients who had survived 1 month after the transplantation was comparable to other studies.

Safety of living donor liver transplantation using older donors

BACKGROUND

There is limited information concerning older donors in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). In the present study, we attempted to clarify whether it is safe to use older donors in LDLT.

METHODS

A total of 129 cases were reviewed in the present study. Donors and recipients were divided into group A (donors aged ≥ 50 y, n=21) and group B (donors aged <50 y, n=108). The pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables of the two groups were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Donors' complication rates were 38.10% and 28.70% for groups A and B, respectively (P=0.719). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y survival rates were 90%, 80%, and 66% for group A and 86%, 83%, and 75% for group B, respectively (P=0.573). Similar Clavien III or more complication rates for recipients were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggested that LDLT using older donors had no negative influence on the outcomes of both donors and recipients.