Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Dual Grafts from Two Donors: A Feasible Option to Overcome Small‐for‐Size Graft Problems?

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) between adults inevitably implies two potential risks associated with a small-for-size graft for the recipient and small remnant liver for the donor. To overcome these problems, LDLT using dual grafts from two independent donors can be a solution, in which sufficient graft volume can be obtained while preserving donor safety. We present a case of LDLT that was managed successfully by using right and left lobe dual grafts from two donors. The recipient was a large-size male with hepatitis C cirrhosis complicated by multiple hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). The first donor donated a right lobe graft and the second donor donated a left lobe plus caudate lobe graft with the middle hepatic vein. Graft function was excellent throughout the course without evidence of small-for-size syndrome. In conclusion, LDLT using dual grafts can be justified in a selected case to avoid small-for-size graft problems without increasing independent donor risks.     

成人间双供体活体肝脏移植成功2例报告

目的供肝短缺是影响肝脏移植发展的主要因素之一，活体供肝是解决这一矛盾的重要措施，供者提供足够的肝脏是影响活体肝脏移植的重要因素。方法施行成人间双供体活体肝移植2例，1例由受者的两位姐姐分别提供左半肝作为供肝，另1例由受者母亲提供右半肝，由无心跳供者提供左半肝(采用劈裂方式，其另一部分肝脏同时为另一成人受者实施肝脏移植)作为供肝。结果术后供、受者肝功能均恢复良好。结论成人问双供肝活体肝脏移植可以为受者提供更大重量的肝脏，又可减少供者提供较多肝脏所带来的风险；双供肝一受者肝脏移植手术操作复杂。     

Regeneration and function of hemiliver graft: right versus left

BACKGROUND: A right liver graft used almost routinely for adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), is associated with a higher incidence of morbidity and mortality in the donor. We compared volume regeneration and graft function between left and right liver grafts to examine the feasibility of using left liver grafts. METHODS: The left liver was considered acceptable as a graft when it was estimated to be over 40% of the recipient standard liver volume. Otherwise, right liver harvesting was used, provided the estimated right liver volume was less than 70% of the donor's standard liver volume. Graft volume on computed tomography and the results of liver function tests 1, 3, and 12 months after LDLT were compared between recipients with left (n = 76) and right (n = 83) grafts. Possible factors influencing graft regeneration were evaluated by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A higher regeneration rate in the left liver graft group resulted in the same ratio of graft to standard liver volume as in the right liver graft group (88% vs 87%) 1 year after LDLT. Liver function tests and 5-year survival rates were comparable between the 2 groups. An episode of acute rejection was a predictive factor for impaired graft regeneration 1 month after LDLT. The initial ratio of graft volume to standard liver volume was an independent factor for regeneration 1 year after LDLT. CONCLUSIONS: A properly evaluated left liver graft can be used as safely as a right liver graft in adult-to-adult LDLT. The findings of the present study justify LDLT with a left liver graft under specific selection criteria and may be preferred to a right liver graft.     

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation at the Asan Medical Center,Korea

Between February 1997 and December 2001, 311 adult-to-adult living donor liver transplants (A-A LDLTs) were performed at the Asan Medical Center for patients above 20 years of age. Indications for A-A LDLT were: chronic hepatitis B (203), chronic hepatitis C (5), hepatocellular carcinoma (64), alcoholic cirrhosis (9), cryptogenic cirrhosis (4), secondary biliary cirrhosis (5), primary biliary cirrhosis (1), Wilson' s disease (2), autoimmune hepatitis (1), hepatic tuberculosis (1), cholangiocarcinoma (1), fulminant hepatic failure (14) and primary non-function of cadaveric liver graft (1). Of 311 A-A LDLTs, 36 were of medical high urgency, 20 were for acute and subacute hepatic failure, 15 were for hepato-renal syndrome and 1 was for primary non-function. Recipient age ranged from 27 to 64 years. Donor age ranged from 16 to 62 years. There was no donor mortality. Implanted liver grafts were categorized into seven types: 175 modified right lobe (MRL), 70 left lobe, 32 right lobe, 20 dual grafts, 10 left lobe plus caudate lobe, three extended right lobe and one posterior segment. In MRL, the tributaries of the middle hepatic vein were reconstructed by interpositioning a vein graft. Indication for dual graft implantation was the same as single graft A-A LDLT, and four of 20 were emergency cases. Of 20 dual grafts, 14 received two left lobes, four received a left lobe and a lateral segment, one received a right lobe and a left lobe and one received a lateral segment and a posterior segment. Graft volume ranged from 28% to 83% of the standard liver volume of the recipients. There were 33 (10.6%) in-hospital mortalities (< 4 months) among the 310 patients after 311 A-A LDLTs. Of the 36 patients receiving emergency transplants, 31 survived. These encouraging results justify the expansion of A-A LDLT in coping with increasing demands, even in urgent situations. We have aimed to introduce the establishment of the efficacy of A-A LDLT in various end-stage chronic and acute liver diseases, as well as new technical advances to overcome small graft-size syndrome by using dual-graft implantation and MRL, both of which were first developed in our department.     

Difficulty in sustaining hepatic outflow in left lobe but not right lobe living donor liver transplantation

Shirouzu Y, Ohya Y, Hayashida S, Asonuma K, Inomata Y. Difficulty in sustaining hepatic outflow in left lobe but not right lobe living donor liver transplantation.
Clin Transplant 2011: 25: 625–632. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Background: Hepatic outflow block is one of the major complications leading to severe graft dysfunction after left lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Medical records of 46 recipients of a left lobe LDLT were reviewed. The method of outflow reconstruction and post‐transplant morphological changes of hepatic veins were investigated. The subjects were followed up until September 2008, with a median follow‐up period of 2.0 yr (range: 0.5–5.9 yr). Results: There were no multiple outflow tracts to be reconstructed, and the median caliber of the single orifices with or without venoplasty was 32.0 mm. The difference between the angle of hepatic veins to the sagittal plane measured on computed tomography was calculated for pre‐operative donors and post‐operative recipients a month after LDLT. Both left and middle hepatic veins showed a significantly greater change in angle than the right hepatic vein. Both left and middle hepatic veins more frequently showed a nearly flat wave form on Doppler study one month after LDLT. In the 46 recipients of left lobe grafts, three developed outflow block (6.5%). Conclusions: The middle and left hepatic veins tend to distort and stretch during graft regeneration. These characteristics seem to be associated with outflow disturbances.     

The first two cases of living donor liver transplantation using dual grafts in Europe.

The major limitation in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an adequate graft size with special regard to the safety of the donor. Only 20% of the evaluated donors are suitable to donate the right liver, depending mainly on the critical remnant liver volume. We report 2 cases of adult-to-adult LDLT using dual grafts. In the first case we implanted a left lateral lobe together with a left lobe; in the second case we used a left lateral and a right lobe. Dual graft LDLT solves the problem of graft-size insufficiency and avoids critical right lobectomy in the donor. This procedure can be safely performed and opens up the possibility of LDLT to even more families in the Western world.     

Anterior segment congestion of a right liver lobe graft in living-donor liver transplantation and strategy to prevent congestion

Background/Purpose. A left lobe graft from a small donor will not usually fulfill the metabolic demands of a larger recipient in adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). One solution to this problem is to use a right lobe graft. However, the necessity of middle hepatic vein (MHV) outflow drainage from the anterior segment (AS) of a right lobe graft has not yet been clearly described in the literature. From July 1997 to February 1998, five right lobe grafts without MHV outflow drainage were implanted in five adult recipients. The graft weights ranged from 650 to 1000 g, and their volumes ranged from 48% to 83% of the ideal liver mass of the recipients. Two grafts showed severe congestion of the AS immediately after reperfusion, followed by prolonged massive ascites and severe liver dysfunction in each patient postoperatively. Eventually, one patient died of sepsis, on posttransplant day 20, demonstrating progressive hepatic dysfunction. Methods. Subsequently, since March 1998, 176 of 208 adult recipients who received a right lobe graft, while demonstrating sizable (greater than 5-mm diameter) MHV tributaries underwent reconstruction of MHV outflow drainage, using the recipient's own autogenous or cryopreserved cadaveric interposition vein grafts. Results. In 170 of the 176 recipients, AS congestion was not demonstrated on enhanced liver computerized tomography (CT) or Doppler ultrasonography (USG) postoperatively, and the patency rate of interposition vein grafts was 96.6% on day 30 posttransplant. Conclusions. A right lobe graft without MHV outflow drainage might result in severe congestion of the AS, which could lead to the patient's death in an extreme situation. Preservation of MHV outflow drainage in a right lobe graft is possible by two harvesting methods: an extended right lobe (ERL) graft, in which the MHV trunk is included in the graft, and a modified right lobe (MRL) graft, in which venous tributaries of the MHV are reconstructed via interposition vein grafts into the recipient's hepatic venous system. From the viewpoint of donor safety, the ERL graft increases the donor's risk more than the MRL graft, because the remaining left liver lobe of the donor does not possess an MHV. Here, we introduce our experiences of MRL grafts in adult-to-adult LDLTs. Received: July 18, 2002 / Accepted: July 25, 2002 RID="*" ID="*" Offprint requests to: S.G. Lee     

Feasibility of Left Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation Between Adults: An 8-Year, Single-Center Experience of 107 Cases

Operative mortality for a right lobe (RL) donor in adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is estimated to be as high as 0.5–1%. To minimize the risk to the donor, left lobe (LL)-LDLT might be an ideal option in adult LDLT. The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility of LL-LDLT between adults based on a single-center experience of 107 LL-LDLTs performed over 8 years. The mean graft weight of LL grafts was 452 g, which amounted to 40.5% of the estimated standard liver volume of the recipients. The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year patient survival rates in LL-LDLT were 81.4, 76.9 and 74.7%, respectively, which were comparable to those of RL-LDLT. Twenty-six grafts (24.3%) were lost for various reasons with three losses directly attributable to small-for-size graft syndrome. Post-operative liver function and hospital stay in LL donors were significantly better and shorter than that in RL donors, while the incidence of donor morbidity was comparable between LL and RL donors. In conclusion, LL-LDLT was found to be a feasible option in adult-to-adult LDLT. Further utilization of LL grafts should be undertaken to keep the chance of donor morbidity and mortality minimal.     

Current concept of small-for-size grafts in living donor liver transplantation

The extended application of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has revealed the problem of graft size mismatching called “small-for-size (SFS) graft syndrome.” The initial trials to resolve this problem involved increasing the procured graft size, from left to right, and even extension to include a right lobe graft. Clinical cases of living right lobe donations have been reported since then, drawing attention to the risks of increasing the liver volume procured from a living donor. However, not only other modes of increasing graft volume such as auxiliary or dual liver transplantation, but also control of the increased portal pressure caused by an SFS graft, such as a portosystemic shunt or splenectomy, have been trialed with some positive results. To establish an effective strategy for transplanting SFS grafts and preventing SFS graft syndrome, it is essential to have precise knowledge and tactics to evaluate graft quality and graft volume, when performing these LDLTs with portal pressure control. We reviewed the updated literature on the pathogenesis of and strategies for using SFS grafts.     

成人——成人间活体右半肝移植

目的 报道对高度紧急的成人终末期肝病患者进行活体右半肝移植的经验。病人及方法 自１９９６年５月到１９９８年８月;对１５例高度紧急的成人终末期肝末期肝病患者进行了活体右半肝移植。１３例术前在重症监护病房,２例因肝病的并发症而住院。     

Right lobe graft in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: For the sake of donor safety in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the left lobe is currently being used most often for the graft. However, size mismatch has been a major obstacle for an expansion of the indication for LDLT to larger-size recipients, because a left lobe graft is not safe enough for them. METHODS: In 1998, LDLT using a right lobe graft was introduced and performed on 26 recipients to overcome the small-for-size problem. The right lobe, which does not include the middle hepatic vein of the donor, was used. Initially, indication for right lobe LDLT was basically defined as an estimated left lobe graft volume/recipient body weight ratio (GRWR) of <0.8%, which was later raised to <1.0%. RESULTS: All the donors recovered from the operation without persistent complications. Two donors with transient bile leakage were successfully treated with a conservative approach. A right lobectomy resulted in more blood loss (337+/-175 ml), and a longer operative time (6.67+/-0.85 hr) than a lateral segmentectomy, but not a left lobectomy. Grafts with a GRWR >0.8% were implanted in all recipients, except for two, who received relatively smaller right lobes (GRWR of 0.68% and 0.66%). In one of these two, the right lobe from the donor was used as the orthotopic auxiliary graft. Postoperative transitory increases in total bilirubin and aspartate transaminoferase for right lobe donors were higher than those for the left lateral segmentectomy. Nineteen recipients (73.1%) were successfully treated with this procedure. The causes of death were not specific for right lobe LDLT, except for one patient with a graft that had multiple hepatic venous orifices. These multiple and separate anastomoses of the hepatic veins caused an outflow block as a result of a positional shift of the graft, which finally led to graft loss. CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that right lobe grafting is a safe and effective procedure, resulting in the expansion of the indication for LDLT to large-size recipients. How to deal with the possible variation in the anatomy of the right lobe graft should be given attention throughout the procedure.     

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation using extended right lobe grafts.

OBJECTIVE: The authors report their experience with living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using extended right lobe grafts for adult patients under high-urgency situations. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The efficacy of LDLT in the treatment of children has been established. The major limitation of adult-to-adult LDLT is the adequacy of the graft size. A left lobe graft from a relatively small volunteer donor will not meet the metabolic demand of a larger recipient. METHODS: From May 1996 to November 1996, seven LDLTs, using extended right lobe grafts, were performed under high-urgency situations. All recipients were in intensive care units before transplantation with five having acute renal failure, three on mechanical ventilation, and all with hepatic encephalopathy. The median body weight for the donors and recipients was 58 kg (range, 41-84 kg) and 65 kg (range, 53-90 kg), respectively. The body weights of four donors were less than those of the corresponding recipients, and the lowest donor-to-recipient body weight ratio was 0.62:1. The extended right lobe graft was chosen because the left lobe volume was <40% of the ideal liver mass of the recipient. RESULTS: Median blood loss for the donors was 900 mL (range, 700-1600 mL) and hospital stay was 19 days (range, 8-22 days). Homologous blood transfusion was not required. Two donors had complications (one incisional hernia and one bile duct stricture) requiring reoperation after discharge. All were well with normal liver function 5 to 10 months after surgery. The graft weight ranged from 490 g to 1140 g. All grafts showed immediate function with normalization of prothrombin time and recovery of conscious state of the recipients. There was no vascular complication, but six recipients required reoperation. One recipient died of systemic candidiasis 16 days after transplantation and 6 (86%) were alive with the original graft at a median follow-up of 6.5 months (range, 5-10 months). CONCLUSIONS: When performed by a team with experience in hepatectomy and transplantation, LDLT, using an extended right lobe graft, can achieve superior results. The technique extends the success of LDLT from pediatric recipients to adult recipients and opens a new donor pool for adults to receive a timely graft of adequate function.     

活体供肝肝移植成功的初步经验--附3例报告

目的 报告3例活体供肝肝移植成功的初步经验。方法 回顾性分析1例肝细胞癌伴肝硬化、1例先天性肝内胆汁淤积症及1例药物性肝炎病人活体供肝肝移植经过和供受体恢复情况。结果 供肝均取自病人父亲，1例为右半肝，另2例为扩大左外叶，供肝重量分别为835g、295g及320g。第1例供体术后有一过性黄疸，且有轻度胆漏，另2例供体术后恢复顺利，无手术并发症。3例病人手术均顺利，1例成人一成人活体供肝肝移植胆道重建为胆管端端吻合，术后定期行全身化疗预防肿瘤复发。2例成人-儿童活体供肝肝移植胆道重建为胆管、空肠Roux-en-Y吻合。3例病人均行肝静脉整形以保证静脉回流通畅。随访至今，供受体已分别健康生存16、14、13个月。结论 严格的病例选择，完善的术前准备，精细的手术操作及正确的术后处理是活体供肝肝移植成功的关键。     

成人间活体肝移植体会：附3例报告

目的总结和分析成人间活体肝移植(LDLT)的临床经验。方法对2007年2月—2007年7月的3例成人间活体肝移植的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果供体为供体右半肝(不带肝中静脉)1例,供体扩大左半肝(带肝中静脉、尾状叶)2例,GV/SLV均≥40%。3对供者及患者术后均恢复良好,无小肝综合征发生,均未出现严重并发症。术后左半肝供者较右半肝供者肝功能恢复更快。结论如左半肝GV/SLV≥40%,可优先选择左半肝作为供肝;胆道重建不必放置胆管引流管;成人间LDLT是治疗终末期肝病的安全有效的手段。     

Modified right liver graft from a living donor to prevent congestion

BACKGROUND: Right liver grafts without middle hepatic vein (MHV) drainage reconstruction resulted in severe congestion of the anterior segment (AS) in our early experience of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, a detailed strategy for preventing such congestion or the necessity of MHV reconstruction has not been discussed in LDLT using a right lobe graft. METHODS: From July 1997 to February 1998, two of five right lobe grafts without MHV drainage reconstruction were complicated with severe congestion of the AS. Thereafter, 42 adult recipients who received right liver grafts with sizable MHV tributaries underwent the reconstruction of MHV drainage. All sizable (>5 mm in diameter) MHV tributaries were preserved during donor hepatectomy and were reconstructed with the recipient's autogenous interposition vein grafts at the bench surgery. The reconstructed vein grafts of this modified right lobe graft were anastomosed to the stump of the MHV and/or left hepatic vein of the recipient after graft revascularization. RESULTS: Serial Doppler ultrasonography, which was regularly checked until 30 days posttransplant, revealed the patent interposition vein graft in 38 of 42 recipients (patency rate 90.5%). In these 38 recipients, no evidence of congestion in the AS was recognized on enhanced computed tomography, while providing enough functioning liver mass comparable to an extended right lobe graft. Also, congestion-related graft injury, such as an infarct of the AS, was not observed in these recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Our early experience indicated the necessity of MHV drainage reconstruction in right lobe grafts, which do not have MHV trunk in certain instances. However, preoperatively, it is difficult to predict the degree of AS congestion of the right liver graft without MHV drainage reconstruction. We suggest aggressive reconstruction of MHV drainage tributaries of the AS, under the circumstances that sizable MHV tributaries are encountered, to prevent possible congestion-related complications.     

Living donor liver transplantation for fulminant hepatic failure

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was originally indicated only for elective cases of pediatric patients with end-stage liver disease. In Japan, however, where liver transplantation from brain-dead donor is performed very rarely, this indication has been expanded to emergency cases such as fulminant hepatic failure (FHF). METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with FHF were treated between May 1992 and April 1999. Causes of acute liver failure were non-A, non-B hepatitis in 27 patients, hepatitis B virus in seven, and hepatitis A virus, Epstein-Barr virus, herpes simplex virus, and chrome poisoning in one each. RESULTS: Four patients did not undergo LDLT because of severe brain damage or combined multiple organ failure. The remaining 34 patients underwent a total of 36 LDLTs, including two retransplantations; 16 children received transplants of 17 lateral segments, three children and eight adults transplants of 11 left lobes, and seven adults transplants of eight right lobes. A total of 15 recipients died, four of primary graft dysfunction, three of refractory acute rejection, two of pneumonia, and one each of ductopenic rejection, sepsis, aplastic anemis, recurrence of Epstein-Barr virus hepatitis, multiple organ failure by chrome poisoning, and unknown hepatic failure. Primary graft dysfunction developed in adult recipients with small-for-size graft transplants, whereas refractory acute rejection and ductopenic rejection occurred in six grafts each of children with non-A, non-B FHF. CONCLUSIONS: LDLT can be safely expanded to cases of FHF in adult patients. Primary graft dysfunction in adult recipients with small-for-size left lobe grafts can be overcome by using right lobes. However, refractory acute rejection and ductopenic rejection in children remain a major problem.     

超声检查对成人间右半肝活体肝移植桥静脉及其引流区域微循环灌注的动态观察

目的探讨常规超声和超声造影对成人间右半肝活体肝移植受者移植肝桥静脉及其引流区域微循环灌注的显像价值。方法选择2009年4月至9月浙江大学医学院附属第一医院连续实施右半肝活体肝移植并进行Ⅴ、Ⅷ段肝中静脉属支架桥的17例受者,于术后1个月内序贯进行桥静脉常规超声和移植肝超声造影检查,监测桥静脉血流情况,分析移植肝实质超声造影灌注表现。结果常规超声对17例受者的19根桥静脉显示良好。术后1d,13根桥静脉血流波形呈三相或二相波形,3根呈单向波形,3根未见彩色血流信号。术后1-2周,11根桥静脉血流波形呈二相波形,4根呈单向波形,4根未见彩色血流信号。术后1个月,10根桥静脉血流波形呈二相波形,5根呈单向波形,4根未见彩色血流信号。术后1～2周移植肝超声造影显示桥静脉引流区域的肝实质灌注表现多变,13例桥静脉未闭塞的受者中7例表现为V、Ⅷ段部分或全部肝组织动脉早期瞬间高增强,形状呈楔形或不规则形,实质期同步消退或提早消退;4例桥静脉闭塞的受者中3例表现为V、Ⅷ段肝组织全程低增强。结论常规超声结合超声造影可以对成人间右半肝活体肝移植桥静脉及其引流区域的微循环进行动态观察,为临床提供桥静脉通畅程度及其引流区域实质灌注的有效信息。     

Salvage living donor liver transplantation after prior liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Salvage liver transplantation has been performed for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or deterioration of liver function after primary liver resection. Because prior liver resection per se is an unfavorable condition for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), we assessed the technical feasibility of LDLT after prior hepatectomy, and we compared the outcome of salvage LDLT with that of primary LDLT in HCC patients. Of 342 patients with HCC, 17 (5%) underwent salvage LDLT, with 5 having undergone prior major liver resection and 12 prior minor resection. During salvage LDLT, 12 patients received right lobe grafts, 3 received left lobe grafts, and 2 received dual grafts. There was 1 incident (5.9%) of perioperative mortality. Recipient operation time was not prolonged in patients undergoing salvage LDLT, but bleeding complications occurred more frequently than in patients undergoing primary LDLT. Overall survival rates after salvage LDLT were similar to those after primary LDLT, especially when the extent of recurrent tumor was within the Milan criteria. These results indicate that every combination of prior hepatectomy and living donor liver graft is feasible for patients undergoing salvage LDLT, and the acceptable extent of HCC for salvage LDLT is equivalent to that for primary LDLT.     

成人活体肝移植单中心56例临床报告

目的探讨成人间右半肝移植手术中保证供、受者安全的方法。方法2002年1月至2006年9月四川大学华西医院对56例受者施行了成人右半肝移植,其中52例不含肝中静脉,4例双供肝肝移植。受者原发病为乙型肝炎肝硬化35例（62．5％,含急性肝功能衰竭12例）,肝细胞肝癌17例（30．4％）,其他4例;MELD评分〉25分者10例。供者常规行三维CT计算全肝体积及右半肝体积,并进行了移植手术技术改进。结果58例供者共摘取55例右半供肝及3例左半供肝。右半供肝均不含肝中静脉,重量为400—860g（中位数550g）,右半供肝与受者标准肝重比为31．7％-71．7％（中位数45．4％）,供者残肝体积均大于全肝体积的35％。58例供者发生并发症7例（12．5％）,无死亡。术后住院时间7—30d（中位数11d）。术后对56例受者随访2—52个月（中位数11个月）,发生并发症15例（26．8％）,死亡4例（7．2％）。1年实际生存率92．8％。结论采用不包含肝中静脉的右半供肝,术前CT测量残肝体积〉35％,同时右半供肝与受者标准肝重比〉40％者进行右半肝移植可保证供受者安全,反之则应考虑采用双供肝肝移植。     

Left Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Adults

Adult left lobe (LL) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has not generally been recognized as a feasible procedure because of the problem of graft size. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility and short‐ and long‐term results of adult LL LDLT in comparison with right lobe (RL) LDLT. Data on 200 consecutive LL LDLTs, including five retransplants, were retrospectively compared with those of 112 RL LDLTs, in terms of survival, complications and donor morbidity. The mean graft weight to standard volume ratio of LL grafts was 38.7% whereas that of RL grafts was 47.6% (p < 0.0001). The 1‐, 5‐ and 10‐year patient survival rates of LL LDLT were 85.6%, 77.9% and 69.5%, respectively, which were comparable to those of RL LDLT (89.8%, 71.3% and 70.7%, respectively). The incidence of small‐for‐size syndrome was higher in LL LDLT (19.5%) than in RL LDLT (7.1%) (p < 0.01). The overall donor morbidity rates were comparable between LL (36.0%) and RL (34.8%), whereas postoperative liver function tests and hospital stay were significantly better (p < 0.0001) in LL donors. In conclusion, adult LL LDLT has comparable outcomes to that of RL LDLT. LL LDLT is viable and is the first choice in adult LDLT.