Quality of life of living donors before and after living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is becoming an established method for treatment of terminal liver disease in adults. After resection of the right hepatic lobe, postoperative complications can arise in healthy donors, and even individual cases of death have been recorded. There remains, however, little research on the psychosocial aspects in living donors before and after LDLT. Using the WHOQOL questionnaire, this prospective study investigates the quality of life (QoL) in a sample of 28 living donors, including the relationship between postoperative complications and QoL before and 6 months after donation. Before LDLT, the donor QoL is high, above that of the general healthy population. After LDLT, a significant reduction in the QoL appears in the areas of "physical health" and "living conditions." Nevertheless, the QoL remains above the level of the general population. Only two donors showed general QoL values below those of the general population. The postoperative complications had no significant influence on the QoL after transplantation. The high QoL of donors following LDLT indicates a positive psychosocial outcome for the majority of donors, irrespective of donation-related complications. Additional psychosocial studies will be necessary to disclose predictors for an unfavorable psychosocial outcome following LDLT.     

Psychosocial outcome of living donors after living donor liver transplantation: a pilot study

In view of the scarcity of organ resources available for transplantation, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is gaining growing importance in the treatment of chronically terminal liver diseases. In the period between December 1999 and October 2000, 47 potential living liver donors were evaluated and 24 right hepatic lobes and two left lateral segments were transplanted at the Virchow-Klinikum of the Charité Hospital in Berlin. The present study looks into biomedical and psychosocial parameters of 23 donors before and 6 months after LDLT. Our aims were to investigate the development of psychosocial parameters after donation and the relationship between psychosocial findings and post-operative complications. Most donors showed an improved quality of life (QoL) after LDLT when compared with pre-operative results. Twenty-six percent of donors show high values for 'tiredness', 'fatigue' and 'limb pain' following donation. The post-operative complications had no influence on the psychosocial outcome. In this pilot study the resection of the right hepatic lobe amounts to a safe operation for donors and holds promise of a good psychosocial outcome for most donors, irrespective of donation-related complications. The pronounced complaints appears to indicate psychological tension and distress in some donors following donation.     

Donor quality of life after living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for children and adults has gained widespread acceptance due to the severe organ shortage. LDLT provides potential recipients with timely transplantation, but this procedure engenders a potentially significant risk to the donor. This study analyzed medical, functional, and psychological donor outcomes after LDLT. Nineteen donors (mean age 33.9 +/- 12 years), who underwent hepatectomy for LDLT (13 right lobectomy for adult LDLT) from March 1998 to November 2002, were interviewed at a median of 13 months after donation (range, 2 to 58 months). According to the Clavien System classification, major complications occurred in three donors (16%), and minor in four (21%). The mean length of hospital stay was 5.7 +/- 1.6 days. Five patients (27%) needed rehospitalization. Complete recovery was achieved at a mean time of 8.5 +/- 3.5 weeks. All 19 donors were able to return to predonation activities. The donor's relationship to the recipient and to their families was improved after donation in all cases; 12 (63%) cited a positive psychological impact on their lives. About 90% would donate again and 84% would recommend donation to someone contemplating it. In conclusion, all donors are alive and well after donation and were able to return to their predonation occupation. Most of them felt that this experience changed their lives for the better and would donate again. Donor safety and quality of life should remain the priority in all donation processes.     

Quality of life and psychiatric complications after adult living donor liver transplantation.

We investigated the psychosocial effects of a right hepatectomy on donors for adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT). Questionnaires were sent to 66 actual donors, who had undergone ALDLT between August 1998 and September 2003, as well as to 139 potential donors, who had been examined as possible candidates for ALDLT; the latter had been excluded and had not undergone surgery. All actual donors reported full recovery within an average period of 14.41 (standard deviation = 8.86) weeks; all had returned to their preoperative employment. In preparation for ALDLT, they had received significantly more support from their families in the decision-making process than the potential donors had (t = 2.02; degree of freedom = 79; P = 0.047); they also felt better informed about donation than the potential donors (t = 2.04; df = 64; P = 0.045). Psychiatric problems occurred in 6 (14%) female donors in the perioperative period, mostly in connection with unrealistic outcome expectations. Donors with severe postoperative complications (n = 3) demonstrated higher scores of psychiatric symptoms (chi-square = 6.39; df = 2; P = 0.041). When we compared potential and actual donors, a significant difference in emotional quality of life was not demonstrated (t = 0.41; df = 76; P = 0.684), and it corresponded to that of the normative sample. For donors, perceived emotional quality of life did not depend on the course of recovery of the recipients. Six to 9 months after donation, potential donors reported a significantly higher physical quality of life than actual donors (t = 2.20; df = 56; P = 0.032). In conclusion, female donors, donors with their own major complications, or donors with unrealistic outcome expectations should be provided with adequate psychosocial care. With regard to the psychosocial outcome, ALDLT is a safe intervention for the donor.     

Quality of life after lobectomy for adult liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION: Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplants are being increasingly performed. Although considerable data are available on the quality of life after kidney donation, there is little comparable information on liver donors. METHODS: Between August 1998 and July 2000, 48 adults received liver grafts from living donors. At least 2 months after donation, donors were mailed a structured questionnaire and the standardized Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a generic measure assessing health-related quality of life outcomes using eight scales: mental health, emotional limits, vitality, social function, physical function, physical limits, pain, general health. RESULTS: Thirty donors (62.5%) responded at a mean of 280+/-157 days after donation. Fifteen (50%) of their recipients had major complications (two deaths, four retransplants, nine biliary complications). Regarding overall satisfaction, all said they would donate again. Compared to published U.S. norms (n=2474), our group of donors scored higher than the general population in seven of eight domains on the SF-36. Donors whose recipients had no complications scored significantly higher in mental health (P<0.007) and general health (P<0.008) compared with U.S. norms. Donors whose recipients had major complications scored significantly lower on the mental health scale than those with recipients without major complications. CONCLUSIONS: Donors did not regret their decision to donate; several felt the experience had changed their lives for the better. Donors scored as well as or better than U.S. norms in general health. Quality of life after donation must remain a primary outcome measure when we consider the utility of living-donor liver transplants.     

Psychosocial aspects of pediatric living donor liver transplantation.

While the medical aspects of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have been investigated to a comparatively large degree, only in recent years have psychosocial aspects like donors' quality of life and attitude towards living donation been dealt with. In the course of a retrospective study, we examined 36 pediatric living liver donors at an average of 4.5 +/- 2.8 years postoperatively. The donation's impact on the family was considered "very high," "high," or "average" by 48% of the donors. The physical impact of the donation was regarded as being higher than the emotional impact. Subjective full recovery was achieved at an average of 4.5 months postoperatively. All patients stated that they would donate again. Donors' quality of life, as assessed with the 36-Item Short-Form Quality of Life Questionnaire (SF-36), was significantly higher than the German normative sample. Anxiety and depression, assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-German version, were significantly lower compared to healthy controls. However, 14 patients (39%) described persistent, mostly physical, symptoms more than 1 yr postoperatively. In conclusion, the study's findings may enable clinicians to achieve a better understanding of living donors' situations, both pre- and postoperatively, and may help to assess the psychosocial risk of LDLT. Knowledge of possible ongoing problems may facilitate intervention at an early stage and should be included among the information given to potential living liver donors. Prospective studies using more specific instruments with an emphasis on the long-term psychosocial outcome of LDLT are needed for future research.     

Living donor liver transplantation and its effect on the donor–recipient relationship – a qualitative interview study with donors

Abstract:  An important aspect in the preoperative evaluation and a legal precondition for an living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a family or emotionally close relationship between donor and recipient. We investigated the development of the donor–recipient relationship after LDLT. We conducted semi-structured clinical interviews with 18 donors as part of a regular postoperative follow-up and analyzed them using the method of Grounded Theory. The donation does not lead to any major changes in the donor-recipient relationship, probably due to careful pre-selection. It does however enhance the existing positive or conflicting character of the relationship. Donors sometimes downplay negative aspects in the relationship and emphasize the improvement as a way of dealing with a major life event. A donation cannot fulfill expectations linked to it and it is unfavorable to be used to improve the relationship. Potential misuse or instrumentalization of the donation by the donor are possible. Postoperative feelings of gratitude are an issue after surgery. A good relationship enhances a better management of the postoperative course. The preoperative donor–recipient relationship should be as free of conflict as possible. A thorough preoperative evaluation of the donor–recipient relationship is particularly important to assess the donors' suitability and clarify conflicts and unrealistic expectations.     

Donor morbidity associated with right lobectomy for living donor liver transplantation to adult recipients: A systematic review

The aim if this study is to determine donor morbidity associated with right lobectomy for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to adult recipients through a systematic review of the published literature. Data sources were English-language reports on donor outcome after LDLT. MEDLINE (1995 to June 2001) was searched using the MeSH terms [ldquo ]living donors[rdquo ] and [ldquo ]liver transplantation.[rdquo ] Limits were set for human only and English language only. Bibliographies of retrieved references were cross-checked to identify additional reports; 211 reports were obtained. Population studies and consecutive and nonconsecutive series were included. All studies reported at least one of the following outcomes specific to living donors (LDs) of right hepatic lobes to adult recipients: surgical and hospital complications, length of hospital stay, readmissions, recovery time, return to predonation occupation, health-related quality of life, or mortality. Abstracts of relevant articles were reviewed independently using predetermined criteria, and appropriate articles were retrieved. Study design and results were summarized in evidence tables. Summary statistics of combined data were performed when possible. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Data on donor morbidity associated with right lobectomy are limited. On the basis of reported data, morbidity associated with LD right lobectomy ranges from 0% to 67%. In conclusion, reported morbidity associated with right lobe donation for LDLT varies widely. Standardized definitions of morbidity and better methods for observing and measuring outcomes are necessary to understand and potentially improve morbidity. Future studies assessing LD outcomes should report donor outcome more explicitly. (Liver Transpl 2002;8:110-117.)     

Living donor financial assistance programs in liver transplantation: The global perspective

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has increased availability of liver transplantation, particularly in countries with limited access to deceased organ donors. It is unclear how individual countries address the financial impact of donation for potential living donors. Herein, living liver donor financial supports were examined, focusing on countries performing ≥10 LDLT per year in the World Health Organization Transplant Observatory. Categories included health insurance coverage, reimbursement of lost wages, employment protection, and other incentives designed to promote living liver donation. Overall, 26 countries have some form of asssistance in removing disincentives to ease the financial burden of living donation, ranging from childcare, accommodations, meals, and travel reimbursement, to coverage of medical complications post-donation. Most countries provide donation-related medical coverage. Fourteen provide reimbursement of lost wages and/or paid time off. Several unique programs were designed to incentivize living donation, including free entry to museums and observatories, parking and airline discounts, and exemptions on mortgages and medical deductibles. This study highlights the broad range of programs designed to support living liver donation in high-volume LDLT countries. The data collected in this study can provide a framework for other nations to propose and implement ethical reimbursement and incentivization for living liver donors.     

Living liver donation: preoperative assessment,anatomic considerations,and long-term outcome

BACKGROUND: A major prerequisite for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) as an acceptable treatment modality is thoughtful consideration of the donor. However, there has been no comprehensive audit of living liver donation focusing on issues such as donor selection, anatomic surveys, and long-term outcome. METHODS: Between June 1990 and January 2002 at our institution, 160 LDLTs were performed and 177 patients were referred for LDLT. For these patients, a total of 203 potential donors were screened. The process of donor selection, safety of donor hepatectomy, and postoperative morbidity were investigated. Additionally, an anonymous questionnaire was administered to 100 donors who had undergone LDLT more than 3 years previously. RESULTS: Thirty-eight (19%) of the 203 donor candidates were excluded. Precise estimation of the hepatic anatomy was indispensable for donor safety. None of the donors showed prolonged postoperative liver dysfunction nor developed complications requiring reoperation or readmission. There was no donor mortality. The responses to the questionnaire indicated that 95% of the living donors had not felt coerced to donate and that 5% were neutral about coercion pressure. There were no severe postoperative aftereffects, but minor problems were reported by 51% of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Our appraisal of the perioperative and long-term postoperative course of LDLT donors revealed that although most donors are satisfied after undergoing LDLT, there is a need for strict attention to the process of donor selection and long-term postoperative follow-up. The outcome of the present series seems to confirm the safety of donor hepatectomy.     

Donor outcomes in right lobe adult living donor liver transplantation: single-center experience in Egypt

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative source of organs for patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) in absence of deceased donor LT. In LDLT the greatest concern is donor safety. Our objective was to evaluate the outcome of donors after right lobe liver donation in a single LT center in Egypt. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty LDL resections were performed from 2001 to 2004. The mean donor age was 29.2 +/- 6.4 years. Residual liver volume was 41.1 +/- 4.5%. Mean operative time was 560 +/- 62.2 minutes; mean ICU stay, less than 24 hours; mean hospital stay, 15.4 +/- 7.7 days; and mean follow-up period, 6 months. RESULTS: There was no mortality. The overall complication rate was 68% (34 donors). Major complications included intraoperative bleeding in one, biliary leak in two, and pneumonia in three donors. Minor complications included mild pleural effusion in 13 donors, transient ascites in 10, mild depression in 7, intra-abdominal collections in 3, and wound infections in 1 donor. Residual liver volume did not affect the complication rate. None required reoperation. Return to predonation activity occurred within 6 to 8 weeks. No liver impairment occurred during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Right lobe adult LDLT is a safe procedure with regard to donor outcome. Major complications occurred in only 10% of our series.     

Health-related Quality of Life of Liver Donors: A Prospective Longitudinal Study

Living donor liver transplantation is a widely accepted option to treat liver diseases in several indications. Risk of liver donation is being discussed and quality of life of donors is also studied. Changes and the change pattern of quality of life were analyzed in this prospective longitudinal study.

Biliary complications in living liver donors

With the increasing use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the morbidity and mortality of the donors have thus become inevitable problems associated with this procedure. The most common postoperative complications among donors for LDLT involve the biliary tract. The incidence of biliary complications in donors tends to be about 5% based on recent publications. Anatomical variations in the biliary tract, higher predonation alkaline phosphatase levels, and intraoperative blood transfusions are also risk factors for biliary complications in the donors after donation. Donors with biliary complications often show unspecific symptoms and most of the biliary complications can be normally treated by nonsurgical methods. Interventional procedures such as percutaneous placement of a peritoneal drain, percutaneous/endoscopic biliary drainage, and combinations of balloon dilatation and/or stenting are effective in the treatment of bile leakage and biliary stricture. A clear understanding of the biliary anatomy of each donor and refined surgical techniques will help to minimize risk of biliary complications for living liver donors.     

Severe psychiatric problems in right hepatic lobe donors for living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: The morbidity and mortality from donation of a right hepatic lobe for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an important issue for this procedure. We report the prevalence of severe psychiatric postoperative complications from the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort study (A2ALL), which was established to define the risks and benefits of LDLT for donors and recipients. METHODS: Severe psychiatric complications were evaluated in all donors from the A2ALL study who were evaluated between 1998 and February 2003. RESULTS: Of the 392 donors, 16 (4.1%) had one or multiple psychiatric complications, including three severe psychiatric complications (suicide, accidental drug overdose, and suicide attempt). CONCLUSIONS: Despite extensive preoperative screening, some donors experience severe psychiatric complications, including suicide, after liver donation. Psychiatric assessment and monitoring of liver donors may help to understand and prevent such tragic events.     

Live donor liver transplantation in adults

Live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was initiated in 1988 for children recipients. Its application to adult recipients was limited by graft size until the first right liver LDLT was performed in Hong Kong in 1996. Since then, right liver graft has become the major graft type. Despite rapid adoption of LDLT by many centers, many controversies on donor selection, indications, techniques, and ethics exist. With the recent known 11 donor deaths around the world, transplant surgeons are even more cautious than the past in the evaluation and selection of donors. The need for routine liver biopsy in donor evaluation is arguable but more and more centers opt for a policy of liberal liver biopsy. Donation of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) in the right liver graft was considered unsafe but now data indicate that the outcome of donors with or without MHV donation is about equal. Right liver LDLT has been shown to improve the overall survival rate of patients with chronic liver disease, acute or acute-on-chronic liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma waiting for liver transplantation. The outcome of LDLT is equivalent to deceased donor liver transplantation despite a smaller graft size and higher technical complexity.     

Current trends in live liver donation

The introduction of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been one of the most remarkable steps in the field of liver transplantation (LT), able to significantly expand the scarce donor pool in countries in which the growing demands of organs are not met by the shortage of available cadaveric grafts. Although the benefits of this procedure are enormous, the physical and psychological sacrifice of the donors is immense, and the expectations for a good outcome for themselves, as well as for the recipients, are high. We report a current overview of the latest trends in live liver donation in its different aspects (i.e. donor's selection, evaluation, operation, morbidity, mortality, ethics and psychology). This review is based on our center's personal experience with almost 200 LDLTs and a detailed analysis of the international literature of the last 7 years about this topic. Knowing in detail how to approach to the different aspects of living liver donation may be helpful in further improve donor's safety and even recipient's outcome.     

Safety of donor in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation using right lobe graft

BACKGROUND: The growing gap between the number of patients awaiting liver transplantation and available organs has continued to be the primary issue facing the transplant community. To overcome the waiting list mortality, living donor liver transplantation has become an option, in which the greatest concern is the safety of the donor, especially in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (A-A LDLT) using a right lobe liver graft. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the safety of donors after right lobe liver donation for A-A LDLT performed in our center. METHODS: From January 2002 to March 2006, 26 patients underwent A-A LDLT using right lobe liver grafts in our center. Seven donors were men and 19 were women (range, 19-65 years; median age, 38 years). The right lobe liver grafts were obtained by transecting the liver on the right side of the middle hepatic vein without interrupting the vascular blood flow. The mean follow-up time for these donors was 9 months. RESULTS: These donor residual liver volumes ranged from 30.5% to 60.3%. We did not experience any donor mortality. Two cases (7.69%) experienced major complications: intra-abdominal bleeding and portal vein thrombosis in one each and three (11.54%), minor ones: wound steatosis in two, and transient chyle leak in one. All donors were fully recovered and returned to their previous occupations. CONCLUSIONS: A-A LDLT using a right lobe liver graft has become a standard option. The donation of right lobe liver for A-A LDLT was a relatively safe procedure in our center.     

Clinical Outcomes and Evaluation of the Quality of Life of Living Donors for Pediatric Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Analysis of 100 Donors

There are few reports about the quality of life (QOL) and morbidities of pediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) donors. We evaluated the potential morbidities and identified the predictive factors regarding the QOL of living donors after pediatric LDLT. This cross-sectional study was a single-center analysis of 100 donors for pediatric LDLT. The severity of morbidities was assessed with the Clavien classification, the QOL was investigated with the short form-36 (SF-36), and the decision-making process regarding donation was analyzed with questionnaires. The median follow-up period was 3.8 years (range, 2.2–6.0 years). A total of 13% of the donors developed postoperative complications of Clavien grades I (7%), II (3%), and IIIA (3%). There was no grade IV morbidity or mortality. Eighty-one donors responded to the questionnaire and SF-36. The analysis of the questionnaires revealed that the donors had difficulty in the decision-making process, and suggested that it may be necessary to administer multistep informed consent. We identified unique predictive risk factors for lower SF-36 scores in the donors, which were the time to donation (more than 4 weeks) and the predonation self-oriented perception. The donors who have risk factors require enhanced pre- and post-donation psychological care.     

Donor quality of life after living donor liver transplantation: single-institute experience

Aim

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been widely accepted because of the severe shortage of hepatic grafts. However, the healthy donor is exposed to risks of morbidity and mortality. In this study, we analyzed medical, functional, and psychological outcomes of donors after hepatectomy for liver donation.

Patients and methods

Among 41 donor hepatectomy cases for LDLT performed in our institute from January 1994 to May 2011, we reviewed the medical records (liver function tests, complications, etc) of 27 subjects who donated to recipients older than 12 years. We also performed a questionnaire survey based on the Japanese Short Form-36 version 2 Health Survey scales as a measure of physical and mental health, to which 31 subjects responded.

Results

Six of the 27 donors experienced prolonged jaundice. Their ratios of graft volume/standard donor liver volume (GV/SDLV) were higher than those of the 21 donors without prolonged jaundice (60.0% vs 41.5%). According to the questionnaires, social functioning among those having undergone emergency hepatectomy as well as general health perceptions declined in those with postoperative complications. Physical component summary declined among those having undergone emergency hepatectomy and with postoperative complications.

Conclusion

In liver donation from a living donor, massive hepatectomy should be avoided. A ratio of GV/SDLV around 50% seems reasonable. Donors with emergency transplantations or postoperative complications must be more carefully followed after donor hepatectomy.     

Current role of liver transplantation for the treatment of urea cycle disorders: a review of the worldwide English literature and 13 cases at Kyoto University.

To address the current role of liver transplantation (LT) for urea cycle disorders (UCDs), we reviewed the worldwide English literature on the outcomes of LT for UCD as well as 13 of our own cases of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for UCD. The total number of cases was 51, including our 13 cases. The overall cumulative patient survival rate is presumed to be more than 90% at 5 years. Most of the surviving patients under consideration are currently doing well with satisfactory quality of life. One advantage of LDLT over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is the opportunity to schedule surgery, which beneficially affects neurological consequences. Auxiliary partial orthotopic liver transplantation (APOLT) is no longer considered significant for the establishment of gene therapies or hepatocyte transplantation but plays a significant role in improving living liver donor safety; this is achieved by reducing the extent of the hepatectomy, which avoids right liver donation. Employing heterozygous carriers of the UCDs as donors in LDLT was generally acceptable. However, male hemizygotes with ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency (OTCD) must be excluded from donor candidacy because of the potential risk of sudden-onset fatal hyperammonemia. Given this possibility as well as the necessity of identifying heterozygotes for other disorders, enzymatic and/or genetic assays of the liver tissues in cases of UCDs are essential to elucidate the impact of using heterozygous carrier donors on the risk or safety of LDLT donor-recipient pairs. In conclusion, LT should be considered to be the definitive treatment for UCDs at this stage, although some issues remain unresolved.