Literature DB >> 22927142

Increasing the recipient benefit/donor risk ratio by lowering the graft size requirement for living donor liver transplantation.

See Ching Chan1, Sheung Tat Fan, Kenneth S H Chok, William W Sharr, Wing Chiu Dai, James Y Y Fung, Kwok Yin Chan, Dharmesh J Balsarkar, Chung Mau Lo.   

Abstract

In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), a right liver graft is larger than a left liver graft and hence leads to better recipient survival. However, in comparison with donor left hepatectomy, donor right hepatectomy carries a higher donor risk. We estimated the expansion of the applicability of left liver living donor liver transplantation (LLDLT) by lowering the graft weight (GW)/standard liver volume (SLV) ratio in increments of 5%. Consecutive LDLT cases were included in this study. The results of computed tomography volumetry provided the graft volume measurements, and the GW was derived from the graft volume with the conversion factor of 1.19 mL/g. We tried to estimate how many more times LLDLT would have been feasible if the GW/SLV requirement had been lowered to 40%, 35%, 30%, or 25%. In all, 361 consecutive donor-recipient pairs underwent LDLT. Right liver living donor liver transplantation (RLDLT) accounted for 95% of the LDLT cases. Most recipients were male (74.2%), and most donors were female (60.4%). The median GW/SLV ratio was 46% (47% for RLDLT and 37% for LLDLT, P < 0.001). Two of the 218 female donors donated the left liver, and 12 of the 93 female recipients received a left liver. In 147 of the 173 cases (85%) when the donor was female and the recipient was male, the GW/SLV ratio did not reach 30%. LLDLT could have been performed more often than 5% of the time if a lower GW/SLV requirement had been adopted. With GW/SLV ratios ≥ 40%, ≥ 35%, ≥ 30%, and ≥ 25%, the proportion of LLDLT cases would have risen from 5% to 5.8%, 12.5%, 29.1%, and 62.3%, respectively. LLDLT could have been performed approximately twice as often with every 5% reduction of the GW/SLV requirement. In conclusion, lowering the graft size requirement could improve the applicability of LLDLT and hence reduce donor risk.
Copyright © 2012 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22927142     DOI: 10.1002/lt.23433

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Liver Transpl        ISSN: 1527-6465            Impact factor:   5.799


  5 in total

1.  Liver transplantation: Left lobe living donor liver transplantation could improve donor outcomes.

Authors:  Claire Greenhill
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 2.  Liver transplantation in 2012: Transplantation for liver cancer--more with better results.

Authors:  Chung-Mau Lo
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 46.802

3.  Evaluating the living donor: expansion by innovation.

Authors:  Chung-Mau Lo
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 6.047

4.  The outcomes of pediatric living donor liver transplantation using small-for-size grafts: experience of a single institute.

Authors:  Naoya Yamada; Yukihiro Sanada; Yuta Hirata; Noriki Okada; Yoshiyuki Ihara; Hideki Sasanuma; Taizen Urahashi; Yasunaru Sakuma; Yoshikazu Yasuda; Koichi Mizuta
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 1.827

5.  Outcomes of right-lobe and left-lobe living-donor liver transplantations using small-for-size grafts.

Authors:  Wong Hoi She; Kenneth Sh Chok; James Yy Fung; Albert Cy Chan; Chung Mau Lo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 5.742

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.