Liver Biopsy Results in Potential Donor Evaluation in Living Related Liver Transplant

Validating controlled attenuation parameter in the assessment of hepatic steatosis in living liver donors

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic steatosis (HS) negatively impacts transplant outcomes in living liver donors. To date, liver biopsy is preferred for HS evaluation. This study aims to evaluate the measurement of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) as a diagnostic tool of HS in living liver donors.

METHODS

Candidates recruited to this study, conducted from April 2016 to February 2020, were potential donors who had undergone transient elastography using Fibroscan® and CAP measurements at liver segments VI and VII, followed by liver biopsy. The HS grades from liver biopsy were classified as S0 (<5%), S1 (5-33%), S2 (33-66%), and S3 (>66%). For CAP, they were S0 (≤218dB/m), S1 (218-249dB/m)), S2 (250-305dB/m)), and S3 (>305dB/m)). The CAP measurements were compared with the liver biopsy results.

RESULTS

Of the 150 potential donors [male, 73.3%; mean age, 30.0±7.0 years; body mass index (BMI), 24.7±3.5kg/m2], 92 (61.3%) had no or mild HS, while 58 (38.7%) and 10% had moderate to severe HS based on CAP and liver biopsy, respectively. Subjects with moderate to severe HS per CAP were mostly males (0.014), and had higher BMI (p = .006), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (.001), gamma-glutamyl transferase (.026), and high-density lipoprotein (.008). On multivariate analysis, high ALT (OR, 1.051; 95% CI, 1.016-1.087; p = .004) was a predictor of significant HS. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of CAP to detect significant HS were 93.3%, 67.4, 24.1%, and 98.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The high sensitivity and negative predictive values of CAP make it a good screening test to exclude significant HS in potential living liver donors which, in turn, can help avoid unnecessary liver biopsies.

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.