Zhenhua Shen1,2, Zhize Wang3, Yuancong Jiang4, Tianchun Wu4, Shusen Zheng1,5,6. 1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. 2. Department of General Surgery, Huzhou Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine (Huzhou Central Hospital), Huzhou, China. 3. Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. 4. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. 5. Key Laboratory of Precision Diagnosis and Treatment for Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Tumor of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China. 6. Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious diseases, Hangzhou, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The outcomes of large-sized graft mismatch in deceased donor liver transplantation (LT) have been rarely studied. The aim of this study was to determine whether a large-sized graft for recipient influenced the post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: A total of 273 patients undergoing LT were enrolled and divided into a large and a normal-sized graft group by graft weight to recipient weight (GWRW) >2.5% (n = 76) or GWRW ≤2.5% (n = 197). Post-operative complications and outcomes were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in demographic characteristics. The rate of complications was significantly higher in the large-sized graft group including early allograft dysfunction (36.8% versus 17.8%, P = 0.001), hepatic necrosis (26.3% versus 13.7%, P = 0.01) and massive hydrothorax (25% versus 14.7%, P = 0.04). The large-sized graft group suffered higher early mortality compared with the normal-sized graft group (30 days: 14.5% versus 5.6%, P = 0.02, 90 days: 21.1% versus 9.6%, P = 0.01). The primary causes of early death were multiple organ failure (10.5% versus 2%, P = 0.002) and sepsis (2.6% versus 1.5%, P = 0.54). Four parameters including donor alanine transaminase, GWRW, estimated blood loss and model for end-stage liver disease score were significant on multivariate analysis, and indicated significant risk factors for the early mortality of recipients. CONCLUSION: In deceased donor LT, GWRW >2.5% is associated with increased liver injury, risk of early mortality and other adverse outcomes. Thus, donor livers should be allocated to recipients with GWRW ≤2.5%.
BACKGROUND: The outcomes of large-sized graft mismatch in deceased donor liver transplantation (LT) have been rarely studied. The aim of this study was to determine whether a large-sized graft for recipient influenced the post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: A total of 273 patients undergoing LT were enrolled and divided into a large and a normal-sized graft group by graft weight to recipient weight (GWRW) >2.5% (n = 76) or GWRW ≤2.5% (n = 197). Post-operative complications and outcomes were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in demographic characteristics. The rate of complications was significantly higher in the large-sized graft group including early allograft dysfunction (36.8% versus 17.8%, P = 0.001), hepatic necrosis (26.3% versus 13.7%, P = 0.01) and massive hydrothorax (25% versus 14.7%, P = 0.04). The large-sized graft group suffered higher early mortality compared with the normal-sized graft group (30 days: 14.5% versus 5.6%, P = 0.02, 90 days: 21.1% versus 9.6%, P = 0.01). The primary causes of early death were multiple organ failure (10.5% versus 2%, P = 0.002) and sepsis (2.6% versus 1.5%, P = 0.54). Four parameters including donor alanine transaminase, GWRW, estimated blood loss and model for end-stage liver disease score were significant on multivariate analysis, and indicated significant risk factors for the early mortality of recipients. CONCLUSION: In deceased donor LT, GWRW >2.5% is associated with increased liver injury, risk of early mortality and other adverse outcomes. Thus, donor livers should be allocated to recipients with GWRW ≤2.5%.