OBJECTIVE: To elicit donor opinions on liver living donation through use of a survey that protected the anonymity of the respondent and to assay long-term (follow-up > 1 year) donor health by a widely recognized instrument for health assessment. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Living-donor liver transplantation is an accepted technique for children that has recently been extended to adults. Limited donor outcomes data suggest favorable results, but no outcomes data have been reported using an instrument that elicits an anonymous response from the donor or employs a widely recognized health survey. METHODS: Forty-one living-donors between June 1992 and June 1999 were identified and included in this study, regardless of specific donor or recipient outcome. Each donor received a 68-question survey and a standard McMaster Health Index. RESULTS: Survey response was 80%. All donors were satisfied with the information provided to them before donation. Eighty-eight percent of donors initially learned of living donation only after their child had been diagnosed with liver disease: 44% through the transplant center, 40% by popular media, 12% by their pediatrician, and 4% by their primary care physician. Physical symptoms, including pain and the surgical wound, were recurrent items of concern. Perception of time to "complete" recovery were less than 3 months (74%), 3 to 6 months (16%), and more than 6 months (10%). Donors' return to physical activities was shown by above-mean McMaster physical scores; scores for social and emotional health were not different from population data. There were no reported changes in sexual function or menstruation after donation, and five of six donors procreated. CONCLUSIONS: Donors overwhelmingly endorsed living donation regardless of recipient outcome or the occurrence of a complication. Eighty-nine percent advocated "increased" application of living donation beyond "emergency situations," and no donor responded that living donation should be abandoned or that he or she felt "forced" to donate.
OBJECTIVE: To elicit donor opinions on liver living donation through use of a survey that protected the anonymity of the respondent and to assay long-term (follow-up > 1 year) donor health by a widely recognized instrument for health assessment. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Living-donor liver transplantation is an accepted technique for children that has recently been extended to adults. Limited donor outcomes data suggest favorable results, but no outcomes data have been reported using an instrument that elicits an anonymous response from the donor or employs a widely recognized health survey. METHODS: Forty-one living-donors between June 1992 and June 1999 were identified and included in this study, regardless of specific donor or recipient outcome. Each donor received a 68-question survey and a standard McMaster Health Index. RESULTS: Survey response was 80%. All donors were satisfied with the information provided to them before donation. Eighty-eight percent of donors initially learned of living donation only after their child had been diagnosed with liver disease: 44% through the transplant center, 40% by popular media, 12% by their pediatrician, and 4% by their primary care physician. Physical symptoms, including pain and the surgical wound, were recurrent items of concern. Perception of time to "complete" recovery were less than 3 months (74%), 3 to 6 months (16%), and more than 6 months (10%). Donors' return to physical activities was shown by above-mean McMaster physical scores; scores for social and emotional health were not different from population data. There were no reported changes in sexual function or menstruation after donation, and five of six donors procreated. CONCLUSIONS: Donors overwhelmingly endorsed living donation regardless of recipient outcome or the occurrence of a complication. Eighty-nine percent advocated "increased" application of living donation beyond "emergency situations," and no donor responded that living donation should be abandoned or that he or she felt "forced" to donate.
Authors: E M Johnson; J K Anderson; C Jacobs; G Suh; A Humar; B D Suhr; S R Kerr; A J Matas Journal: Transplantation Date: 1999-03-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: M D Smith; D F Kappell; M A Province; B A Hong; A M Robson; S Dutton; T Guzman; J Hoff; L Shelton; E Cameron Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 1986-10 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Dieter C Broering; Christian Wilms; Pamela Bok; Lutz Fischer; Lars Mueller; Christian Hillert; Christian Lenk; Jong-Sun Kim; Martina Sterneck; Karl-Heinz Schulz; Gerrit Krupski; Axel Nierhaus; Detlef Ameis; Martin Burdelski; Xavier Rogiers Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Mary Amanda Dew; Allan Zuckoff; Andrea F DiMartini; Annette J DeVito Dabbs; Mary L McNulty; Kristen R Fox; Galen E Switzer; Abhinav Humar; Henkie P Tan Journal: Prog Transplant Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 1.187
Authors: Mudhar Al Adawi; Hasina Al Harthi; Raja Al Hinai; Suad Al Haddabi; Iqbal Al Busaidi; Omar Al Siyabi; Salah Thabit Al Awaidy Journal: J Transplant Date: 2021-11-15