Piyush K Sinha1, Nihar Mohapatra1, Kishore Gs Bharathy1, Guresh Kumar2, Viniyendra Pamecha1. 1. Department of Hepato Pancreato Biliary and Liver Transplant Surgery, Institute of Liver & Biliary Sciences, D1 Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, 110070, India. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Liver & Biliary Sciences, D1 Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, 110070, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Comprehensive assessment of quality of life of live liver donors is required for adequate donor outcome reporting, but there is a lack of prospective data. Assessment of all aspects of liver donation over a long period is a necessity to have complete understanding of the donation process. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of liver donors operated between March 2012 to August 2013, examined donors (n = 52) from predonation to five years after the donation. Participants were administered 'World Health Organization quality of life Brief and questionnaires' regarding their attitude predonation, their overall well-being in terms of abdominal symptoms, cosmesis, and satisfaction with donation and consent process at predefined time points till five years after donation. The weight of the donors was recorded at predefined time points. RESULTS: The donors whose recipients died were less likely to continue with the study (8.9% vs. 71.4%; P < 0.001). After surgery, physical domain took 2 years to reach to predonation level while psychological and social relationship domains took 3 months and 1 month, respectively; environmental domain remained stable throughout. Even after recovery and discharge from hospital, donors experienced abdominal symptoms for a long period of time, but as the time increased from donation the reporting of symptoms decreased. Body image scores (12 ± 2.46 at 3 months vs. 14.9 ± 3.16 at five years, P < 0.001) and cosmesis scores (14.6 ± 3.67 at 3 months vs. 18.75 ± 3 at five years, P < 0.001) significantly improved over time. There was significant weight gain in donors (65.2 ± 6.1 kg predonation vs. 70.69 ± 2.4 kg at 2 years P < 0.001). Donors understood the consent process well, but did not use it for decision making. Overall, they showed a high level of satisfaction in the donation process. CONCLUSION: Donors have good quality of life and show steady recovery in all aspects. Recipient death affects attitude towards donation process.
BACKGROUND: Comprehensive assessment of quality of life of live liver donors is required for adequate donor outcome reporting, but there is a lack of prospective data. Assessment of all aspects of liver donation over a long period is a necessity to have complete understanding of the donation process. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of liver donors operated between March 2012 to August 2013, examined donors (n = 52) from predonation to five years after the donation. Participants were administered 'World Health Organization quality of life Brief and questionnaires' regarding their attitude predonation, their overall well-being in terms of abdominal symptoms, cosmesis, and satisfaction with donation and consent process at predefined time points till five years after donation. The weight of the donors was recorded at predefined time points. RESULTS: The donors whose recipients died were less likely to continue with the study (8.9% vs. 71.4%; P < 0.001). After surgery, physical domain took 2 years to reach to predonation level while psychological and social relationship domains took 3 months and 1 month, respectively; environmental domain remained stable throughout. Even after recovery and discharge from hospital, donors experienced abdominal symptoms for a long period of time, but as the time increased from donation the reporting of symptoms decreased. Body image scores (12 ± 2.46 at 3 months vs. 14.9 ± 3.16 at five years, P < 0.001) and cosmesis scores (14.6 ± 3.67 at 3 months vs. 18.75 ± 3 at five years, P < 0.001) significantly improved over time. There was significant weight gain in donors (65.2 ± 6.1 kg predonation vs. 70.69 ± 2.4 kg at 2 years P < 0.001). Donors understood the consent process well, but did not use it for decision making. Overall, they showed a high level of satisfaction in the donation process. CONCLUSION: Donors have good quality of life and show steady recovery in all aspects. Recipient death affects attitude towards donation process.
Keywords:
GERD, gastroesophageal reflux disease; HRQOL, health-related quality of life; LDLT, live-donor liver transplantation; LLDs, live liver donors; SF 36, Short Form 36; WHOQOL-BREF, World Health Organization quality of life Brief; donor cosmesis; liver donor quality of life; living liver donor symptoms; living-donor liver transplantation
Authors: Vanessa R Humphreville; David M Radosevich; Abhinav Humar; William D Payne; Raja Kandaswamy; John R Lake; Arthur J Matas; Timothy L Pruett; Srinath Chinnakotla Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2015-11-13 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: James F Trotter; Brenda W Gillespie; Norah A Terrault; Michael M Abecassis; Robert M Merion; Robert S Brown; Kim M Olthoff; Paul H Hayashi; Carl L Berg; Robert A Fisher; James E Everhart Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: D A DuBay; S Holtzman; L Adcock; S Abbey; S Greenwood; C Macleod; A Kashfi; M Jacob; E L Renner; D R Grant; G A Levy; G Therapondos Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Daniela P Ladner; Mary Amanda Dew; Sarah Forney; Brenda W Gillespie; Robert S Brown; Robert M Merion; Chris E Freise; Paul H Hayashi; Johnny C Hong; April Ashworth; Carl L Berg; James R Burton; Abraham Shaked; Zeeshan Butt Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2014-09-06 Impact factor: 30.083