The conventional technique in in-situ split-liver transplantation

Split-liver transplantation are innovative surgical techniques of graft creation that expand the cadaver donor pool and decrease reliance upon living-donation. To date, split-liver transplantation has been principally applied to pediatric recipients with excellent outcomes. Significant decreases in pediatric wait-list times, wait-list morbidity, and lower utilization of living-donation at centers that routinely implement split-liver transplantation have led to renewed interest in expanding these techniques to include two adult recipients from one adult cadaver donor. This article details technical considerations of the conventional in situ split procedure for the creation of a pediatric left lateral segment graft and an adult trisegment graft, and summarizes current outcomes. Received: March 31, 2002 / Accepted: July 18, 2002 RID="*" ID="*" Offprint requests to: H. Yersiz     

Split Liver Transplantation for Two Adult Recipients: An Initial Experience

The shortage of cadaver donor livers has been most severe for adult patients. Split liver transplantation is one method to expand the donor pool, but to have a significant impact on the waiting list, it needs to be applied for 2 adult recipients. We split livers from 6 cadaver donors, and transplanted 12 adult recipients. All splits were performed in situ with transection through the midplane of the liver, resulting in a right lobe and a left lobe graft. Mean donor age was 19.7 years; mean donor weight was 79.1 kg. Mean recipient age was 41.5 years. Mean weight of right lobe recipients was 89 kg; left lobe recipients, 60 kg. All donors were hemodynamically stable and had normal liver function tests. Mean operative time for the procurement was 7.4 h. Average blood loss during the transection of the liver was 490 mL. Mean GW/ RW ratio for all recipients was 0.87%; right lobe recipients, 0.86%; and left lobe recipients, 0.88%. With mean follow-up of 9.3 months, patient and graft survival rates were both 83.3%. There were 2 deaths: 1 after hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) and subsequent multiorgan failure; the other after HAT, a liver retransplant, and subsequent gram-negative sepsis. The remaining 10 recipients are doing well. We observed no cases of primary nonfunction. Other complications included bile leak and/or stenosis (n = 3), bleeding from the Roux loop (n = 1), bleeding after percutaneous biopsy (n = 1), and incisional hernia (n = 1). In conclusion, split liver transplantation, using 1 cadaver liver for 2 adult recipients, can be performed successfully. Crucial to success is proper donor and recipient selection.     

Split-Liver Transplantation: Results of Statewide Usage of the Right Trisegmental Graft

Split-liver transplantation (SLT) effectively expands the cadaveric donor pool for children. The remaining right trisegmental (RTS) graft can be transplanted into adults. Limited information exists regarding the outcomes of RTS allografts. Sixty-five RTS graft recipients from five adult transplant programs in Texas were identified. Donor and recipient information were analyzed retrospectively. Most livers (75%) were originally allocated to pediatric recipients. Liver splitting occurred via the in situ (72%) and ex situ (28%) techniques. Arterial reconstruction of RTS grafts was common (52%). Patient and graft survival at 3 months were comparable for the in situ and ex situ techniques (p = 0.2). Cox regression showed only in situ splitting to be a predictor of outcome longer than 3 months posttransplant. Sharing of grafts between centers was frequent (37% of total). One-year patient and allograft survival (87.1% and 85.4%) were excellent with no cases of primary nonfunction. SLT consistently generates two functional liver allografts with excellent recipient survival. In situ splitting of the liver is the preferred technique. Decreased survival is observed with RTS graft use in higher risk recipients. Broader application of SLT with increased sharing is feasible and safely expands the number of liver allografts that can be transplanted.     

Frequency of whole‐organ in lieu of split‐liver transplantation over the last decade: Children experienced increased wait time and death

Organ shortage is a barrier to liver transplantation (LT). Split LT (SLT) increases organ utilization, saving 2 recipients. A simulation of Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing data (2007‐2017) was performed to identify whole‐organ LT grafts (WLT) that met the criteria for being splittable to 2 recipients. Waitlist consequences presented. Deceased donor (DD) livers transplanted as whole organs were evaluated for suitability to split. Of these DD organs, we identified the adolescent and adult recipients of WLT who were suitable for SLT. Pediatric candidates suitable to share the SLT were ascertained from DD match‐run lists, and 1342 splittable DD organs were identified; 438 WLT recipients met the criteria for accepting a SLT. Review of the 438 DD match‐run lists identified 420 children next on the list suitable for SLT. Three hundred thirty‐three children (79%) underwent LT, but had longer wait‐times compared to 591 actual pediatric SLT recipients (median 147 days vs 44 days, P  < 0.001). Thirty‐three of 420 children died on waitlist after a mean 206 days (standard deviation 317). Sharing organs suitable for splitting increases the number of LT, saving more lives. With careful patient selection, SLT will not be a disadvantage to the adult recipients. With a children‐first allocation scheme, SLT will naturally increase the number of allografts because adult organs are too large for small children.     

Split liver transplantation is utilized infrequently and concentrated at few transplant centers in the United States

Split liver transplantation (SLT) is 1 strategy for maximizing the number of deceased donor liver transplants. Recent reports suggest that utilization of SLT in the United States remains low. We examined deceased donor offers that were ultimately split between 2010 and 2014. SLTs were categorized as “primary” and “secondary” transplants. We analyzed allocation patterns and used logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with secondary split discard. Four hundred eighteen livers were split: 54% from adult, 46% from pediatric donors. Of the 227 adult donor livers split, 61% met United Network for Organ Sharing “optimal” split criteria. A total of 770 recipients (418 primary and 352 secondary) were transplanted, indicating 16% discard. Ninety‐two percent of the 418 primary recipients were children, and 47% were accepted on the first offer. Eighty‐seven percent of the 352 secondary recipients were adults, and 7% were accepted on the first offer. Of the 352 pairs, 99% were transplanted in the same region, 36% at the same center. In logistic regression, shorter donor height was associated with secondary discard (odds ratio 0.97 per cm, 95% CI 0.94‐1.00, P = .02). SLT volume by center was not predictive of secondary discard. Current policy proposals that incentivize SLT in the United States could increase the number of transplants to children and adults.     

Splitting the cadaveric liver into right and left lobes for two adult recipients

Objective: To identify the outcomes and risks of split-liver transplantation (SLT) for two adult recipients to determine the feasibility of more widespread use of this procedure to increase the graft pool for adults. Summary of Background: The shortage of cadaver liver grafts for adults is increasing. Using livers from donors defined as optimal, the authors have been developing techniques for SLT for two adult recipients at their center. Methods: From July 1993 to December 1999, 34 adults have undergone SLT with grafts from optimal donors prepared by ex situ split (n = 30) or in situ split (n = 4), and 88 adults received optimal whole-liver grafts that were not split. Four split-grafts were transplanted at other centers. The outcomes of transplantation with right and left split-liver grafts were compared with those of whole-liver transplants. The main end points were patient and graft survival at 1 and 2 years and the incidence and types of complications. Results: For whole-liver, right and left split-liver grafts, respectively, patient survival rates were 88%, 74%, and 88% at 1 year and 85%, 74%, and 64% at 2 years. Graft survival rates were 88%, 74%, and 75% at 1 year and 85%, 74%, and 43% at 2 years. Patient survival was adversely affected by graft steatosis and recipients inpatient status before transplantation. Graft survival was adversely affected by steatosis and a graft-to-recipient body weight ratio of less than 1%. Primary nonfunction occurred in three left split-liver grafts. The rates of arterial (6%) and biliary (22%) complications were similar to published data from conventional transplantation for an adult and a child. SLT for two adults increased the number of recipients by 62% compared with whole-liver transplantation and was logistically possible in 16 of the 104 (15%) optimal cadaver donors. Conclusions: Split-liver transplantation for two adults is technically feasible. Outcomes and complications rates can be improved by rigid selection criteria for donors and recipients, particularly for the smaller left graft, and possibly also by in situ splitting in cadaver donors. Wider use will require changes in the procedures for graft allocation and coordination between centers experienced in the techniques.     

Outcomes of left split graft transplantation in Europe: report from the European Liver Transplant Registry

Split liver transplantation (SLT) has been widely adopted across Europe, resulting in remarkable reduction in the paediatric waiting‐list mortality. Left split graft (LSG) is commonly used for paediatric recipients; however, deceased donor criteria selection are not universal. The aim of this study was to analyse the LSG outcome from the European Liver Transplant Registry and to identify risk factors for graft failure. Data from 1500 children transplanted in 2006–2014 with LSG from deceased donors were retrospectively analysed. Overall, graft losses were 343(22.9%) after 5 years from transplantation, 240(70.0%) occurred within the first 3 months. Estimated patient survival was 89.1% at 3 months and 82.9% at 5 years from SLT. Re‐transplantation rate was 11.5%. At multivariable analysis, significant risk factors for graft failure at 3 months included the following: urgent SLT (HR = 1.73, P = 0.0012), recipient body weight ≤6 kg (HR = 1.91, P = 0.0029), donor age >50 years (HR = 1.87, P = 0.0039), and cold ischaemic time (CIT) [HR = 1.07 per hour, P = 0.0227]. LSG has good outcomes and SLT is excellent option for paediatric recipients in the current organ shortage era. We identified practical guidelines for LSG donor and recipient selection criteria: donor age may be safely extended up to 50 years in the absence of additional risk factors; thus, children <6 kg and urgent transplantation need CIT <6 h and appropriate graft/recipient size‐matching to achieve good outcomes.     

Split-liver transplantation for two adult recipients: feasibility and long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE: To identify the outcomes and risks of split-liver transplantation (SLT) for two adult recipients to determine the feasibility of more widespread use of this procedure to increase the graft pool for adults. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The shortage of cadaver liver grafts for adults is increasing. Using livers from donors defined as optimal, the authors have been developing techniques for SLT for two adult recipients at their center. METHODS: From July 1993 to December 1999, 34 adults have undergone SLT with grafts from optimal donors prepared by ex situ split (n = 30) or in situ split (n = 4), and 88 adults received optimal whole-liver grafts that were not split. Four split-grafts were transplanted at other centers. The outcomes of transplantation with right and left split-liver grafts were compared with those of whole-liver transplants. The main end points were patient and graft survival at 1 and 2 years and the incidence and types of complications. RESULTS: For whole-liver, right and left split-liver grafts, respectively, patient survival rates were 88%, 74%, and 88% at 1 year and 85%, 74%, and 64% at 2 years. Graft survival rates were 88%, 74%, and 75% at 1 year and 85%, 74%, and 43% at 2 years. Patient survival was adversely affected by graft steatosis and recipients inpatient status before transplantation. Graft survival was adversely affected by steatosis and a graft-to-recipient body weight ratio of less than 1%. Primary nonfunction occurred in three left split-liver grafts. The rates of arterial (6%) and biliary (22%) complications were similar to published data from conventional transplantation for an adult and a child. SLT for two adults increased the number of recipients by 62% compared with whole-liver transplantation and was logistically possible in 16 of the 104 (15%) optimal cadaver donors. CONCLUSIONS: Split-liver transplantation for two adults is technically feasible. Outcomes and complication rates can be improved by rigid selection criteria for donors and recipients, particularly for the smaller left graft, and possibly also by in situ splitting in cadaver donors. Wider use will require changes in the procedures for graft allocation and coordination between centers experienced in the techniques.     

A case report of split liver transplantation for two adult recipients in Korea

We report a case of split liver transplantation (SLT) for two adult recipients, which was the first successful case in Korea. The brain-dead donor was a 22-year-old man weighing 65 kg, but his liver volume was estimated as 2120 mL on computed tomographic volumetry. As it seemed to be too large for a 60-kg recipient candidate, SLT was planned after assessment of lobar liver volume and middle hepatic vein anatomy. The right lobe was mobilized first and the liver parenchyma transected along the right border of the middle hepatic vein. The 1240-g right lobe (segments 5 to 8) graft was implanted into a 57-year-old male patient with acute-on-chronic liver failure in the same manner as a living-donor graft. After that, routine procedures of cadaveric multiorgan procurement were performed. The 670-g left lobe (segments 1 to 4) with a retrohepatic vena cava, common bile duct, and aortic patch was implanted into another 37-year-old male recipient. These two recipients recovered uneventfully surviving 12 months to date. We integrated the surgical techniques learned from hundreds of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplants into this first trial of two adult SLT.     

Long-term outcomes of single paediatric vs. ideal adult renal allograft transplants in adult recipients

AIM: To compare the outcomes of single paediatric vs. adult kidneys transplanted into adult recipients. METHODS: A retrospective single-centre review of 38 single cadaver kidney transplants from donors less than five yr of age to wait-listed patients of low body mass index (BMI). Survival of grafts and quality of renal function were compared with 121 similarly low BMI recipients of grafts from donors 18-45 yr of age that were transplanted during the same period. Immunosuppression consisted of sirolimus, minimal-dose cyclosporine and prednisone. The mean age of the paediatric vs. adult donors was 2.8+/-1.0 and 31.1+/-9.2 yr, respectively (p<0.01) and of the recipients, 42.0+/-12.4 and 45.7+/-14.8 yr, respectively (p=NS). The mean BMI of paediatric vs. adult donor kidney recipients was 21.8+/-2.9 and 22.4+/-2.0 kg/m2 (p=NS). Sixty-six per cent of paediatric donor recipients were women compared with 44% of adult donor recipients (p=0.03). RESULTS: Death censored actuarial graft survivals at one and five yr for recipients of paediatric vs. adult donor grafts were 93 and 84% compared with 93 and 85% (p=NS). There were no graft losses because of technical complications in the paediatric kidney donor group. At one and five yr post-transplantation, the mean estimated creatinine clearances of the paediatric donor graft recipients were 52.9+/-19.6 and 54.0+/-17.8 mL/min, respectively, compared with 56.4+/-19.8 and 49.1+/-21.7 mL/min for recipients of adult donor grafts at the same times (p=NS). CONCLUSION: Transplantation of single paediatric donor kidneys into low BMI adult recipients provided equivalent outcomes to those of grafts from adult donors between the ages of 18 and 45 yr.     

Long-term results of in situ split-liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Split-liver transplantation (SLT) offers immediate expansion of the cadaver donor pool. The principal beneficiaries have been adult and pediatric recipients with excellent outcomes. This study analyzed a single-center experience of adult to adult in situ SLT in adult recipients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fourteen consecutive adult-to-adult in situ SLT have been performed at our institution since 1998. The extended right lobe comprising segment 1 was transplanted in to adult patients, the left lateral segment, for pediatric transplants. RESULTS: Donors of SLT were significantly younger (P = .03) than those of whole liver transplants. Survival rates of patients receiving a split liver were 83%, 73%, and 73% at 1, 3, and 5 years after the transplant respectively and grafts of 73%, 73%, and 73% for SLT and 76%, 70%, and 66% for whole liver transplants (P = .44). The rate of biliary complication after SLT was 21%, which was comparable to that after whole organ transplantation (17%). The incidence of hepatic artery thrombosis and primary nonfunction was not significantly different between split liver and whole organ transplantation performed during the same time period (7% versus 4.6% P = .67 and 7% versus 2.6% P = .32, respectively). CONCLUSION: This limited single-center experience confirmed that both early and long-term results of SLT are comparable to those of traditional whole liver organ transplantation.     

Reduced size liver transplantation,split liver transplantation,and living related liver transplantation in relation to the donor organ shortage

Because of the shortage of cadaveric donors, three techniques of partial liver grarting have been developed. These techniques are placed in perspective in relation to the organ shortage. Reduced size liver transplantation (RSLTx) is widely used and has results comparable to those from whole liver grafting. However, this technique, while benefitting pediatric patients, reduces the adult donor liver pool. It also makes inefficient use of an available adult donor liver. In split liver transplantation (SPLTx), the whole liver is used after bipartition for two recipients. The results are comparable to those of RSLTx. The problem with SPLTx is that it is a very demanding technique applied only in centers with extensive experience with liver resection and reduction. Living related liver transplantation (LRLTx) yields excellent results; however, it places an otherwise healthy person at risk. It is argued that instead of performing risky operations on healthy persons, the health authorities should take specific measures to alleviate the organ shortage. In the meantime, SPLTx should be developed further because of its optimal use of donor tissue. As for LRLTx, its excellent results and the present shortage of size-matched pediatric liver donors justify its use, at least for now.     

Split‐liver transplantation in the high‐MELD adult patient: are we being too cautious?

The fear that patients with high-mathematical model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score may not be suitable candidates for segmental grafts because of their need for greater liver mass has continued to push the transplant community toward the use of whole LT (WLT) in preference to split LT (SLT). In order to define the outcome of segmental liver transplantation in a better manner in high-MELD patients (score ≥26), we queried the UNOS registry for graft and patient survival results according to MELD score in adult patients receiving WLT and SLT in the United States from the inception of MELD allocation (February 27, 2002) through March 9, 2007. A total of 316 adult patients received a SLT as compared with 20 778 WLTs. Patient and graft survival rates at 6 and 12 months were comparable for all MELD ranges, including the 'high-MELD' recipients (e.g. at MELD score 31–35, patients' and grafts' survival rates at 12 months was 87.5% in SLT group vs. 84.4% and 76.7% in WLT group respectively). The results even at higher MELD scores (i.e. >35) were more than acceptable. In conclusion, patient and graft survival rates for SLT in high-MELD adult patients are comparable to the same for WLT.     

Predictors of survival after In vivo split liver transplantation: analysis of 110 consecutive patients

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors that influence patient survival after in vivo split liver transplantation (SLT). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Split liver transplantation is effective in expanding the donor pool, and its use reduces the number of deaths in patients awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation. Early SLTs were associated with poor outcomes, and acceptance of the technique has been slow. A better understanding of the factors that influence patient and graft survival would be useful in widening the application of SLT. METHODS: During a 3.5-year period, 55 right and 55 left lateral in vivo split grafts were transplanted in 102 pediatric and adult recipients. The authors' in vivo split technique has been previously described. Median follow-up was 14.5 months. Recipient, donor, and surgical variables were analyzed for their effect on patient survival after SLT. RESULTS: Overall survival rates of patients who received an SLT were not significantly different from those of patients who received whole organ transplants. Survival of left lateral segment recipients, at median follow-up time, was 76% versus 80% in patients receiving a trisegment. Fifty of 102 patients (49%) were high-risk urgent recipients (United Network for Organ Sharing [UNOS] status 1 and 2A) and 52 (51%) were nonurgent recipients (UNOS status 2B, 3). High-risk recipients had a survival rate significantly lower than that of nonurgent recipients. By univariate comparison, two variables-UNOS status and number of transplants per patient-were significantly associated with an increased risk of death. Preoperative recipient mechanical ventilation, preoperative prothrombin time, donor sodium level, donor length of hospital stay, and warm ischemia time approached significance. The type of graft (right vs. left) did not reduce the survival rate after transplantation. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified UNOS status and length of donor hospital stay as independent predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patient survival of in vivo SLT is not significantly different from that of whole-organ orthotopic liver transplantation. The variables affecting outcome of in vivo SLT are similar to those in whole-organ transplantation. in vivo SLT should be widely applied to expand a severely depleted donor pool.     

The influence of recipient age on kidney transplant outcome

Summary: The influence of recipient age on kidney transplant outcome was analyzed in more than 80 000 adult recipients of primary renal cadaver transplants and 10 000 recipients of related donor transplants. Elderly recipients showed only a modest decrease in graft survival when compared to young patients. However, the patient survival rate was significantly associated with recipient age. the 10 year patient survival rate in 16-40-year-old cadaver transplant recipients was nearly 50% higher than that in 66–70-yearold recipients (81 ± 1% vs 34 ± 6%, P < 0.0001). A similar age effect on the patient survival rate was noted among related donor transplant recipients. the rate of functioning grafts is similar in young and elderly adults; however, elder transplant recipients are exposed to a much higher risk of death after transplantation.     

补救性肝移植19例手术体会

目的探讨采用补救性肝移植(salvage liver transplantation,SLT)治疗原发性肝细胞癌(肝癌)切除术后肝内复发或肝功能衰竭的疗效及手术体会。方法肝癌切除术后肝内复发16例,肝癌切除术后肝功能衰竭3例,其中合并肾功能异常2例,均接受SLT。术前充分评估病情。手术方式采用附加腔静脉整形的改良背驮式原位肝移植,其中肾功能异常的2例采用股静脉-颈内静脉转流术。肝动脉的重建采用供肝腹腔干动脉与受者肝固有动脉行端端吻合17例,采用供肝腹腔干动脉通过供者髂动脉间置搭桥与受者腹主动脉行端侧吻合2例。胆道的重建全部采用胆道端端吻合。术程始终遵循精细的无瘤操作,术后常规抗排斥和抗感染治疗,并对患者进行了长期随访。结果围手术期19例SLT患者无死亡。术后1、3、5年累积生存率分别为100%、84%、84%;1、3、5年无瘤生存率分别为100%、89%、89%。结论采用SLT治疗肝癌切除术后肝内复发或肝功能衰竭患者的疗效较好。采用腔静脉整形的改良背驮式肝移植术式、充分的术前评估以及遵循精细的无瘤操作是手术成功的关键。     

A national mandatory‐split liver policy: A report from the Italian experience

To implement split liver transplantation (SLT) a mandatory‐split policy has been adopted in Italy since August 2015: donors aged 18‐50 years at standard risk are offered for SLT, resulting in a left‐lateral segment (LLS) graft for children and an extended‐right graft (ERG) for adults. We aim to analyze the impact of the new mandatory‐split policy on liver transplantation (LT)‐waiting list and SLT outcomes, compared to old allocation policy. Between August 2015 and December 2016 out of 413 potentially “splittable” donors, 252 (61%) were proposed for SLT, of whom 53 (21%) donors were accepted for SLT whereas 101 (40.1%) were excluded because of donor characteristics and 98 (38.9%) for absence of suitable pediatric recipients. The SLT rate augmented from 6% to 8.4%. Children undergoing SLT increased from 49.3% to 65.8% (P = .009) and the pediatric LT‐waiting list time dropped (229 [10‐2121] vs 80 [12‐2503] days [P = .045]). The pediatric (4.5% vs 2.5% [P = .398]) and adult (9.7% to 5.2% [P < .001]) LT‐waiting list mortality reduced; SLT outcomes remained stable. Retransplantation (HR = 2.641, P = .035) and recipient weight >20 kg (HR = 5.113, P = .048) in LLS, and ischemic time >8 hours (HR = 2.475, P = .048) in ERG were identified as predictors of graft failure. A national mandatory‐split policy maximizes the SLT donor resources, whose selection criteria can be safely expanded, providing favorable impact on the pediatric LT‐waiting list and priority for adult sick LT candidates.     

Combination splitting using both in situ and ex situ techniques in triple split liver transplantation in pigs

In situ splitting of cadaver livers has been reported to reduce cold ischemic damage, to avoid biliary complications, and to result in improved graft survival. In this study, which involved a wider application of split liver transplantation (SLT), we examined the effects of a technique combining both ex situ and in situ splittings in triple SLT in pigs and compared it to ex situ splitting alone. In the combination splitting group, the splitting between the right and left lobes was done in situ with perfusion of the left lobe with cold, lactated Ringer's solution; that between the lateral and medical right lobes was done ex situ in backtable surgery. The time required for in situ splitting was 28 ± 5 min. The time for backtable surgery and the total ischemia time were significantly shorter in the combination splitting group than that in the ex situ splitting group (P < 0.05). One day after triple SLT, the elevations in both serum AST and LDH in the ex situ splitting group were significantly greater than those in the combination splitting group (P < 0.05). We conclude that combination splitting may provide a technical improvement and have a beneficial effect on the clinical application of triple SLT. Received: 21 October 1997 Received after revision: June 9, 1998 Accepted: July 8, 1998     

成人-成人活体右半肝移植16例报告

目的　报道东京大学 16例成人终末期肝病患者进行活体右半肝移植的经验。方法　统计自 2 0 0 0年 10月到 2 0 0 1年 4月 ,对 16例成人终末期肝病患者进行了活体右半肝移植。供体和受体的平均体重分别为 5 5kg(42 - 78kg)和 5 7kg(41- 81kg)。结果　供体手术的平均失血量为 80 0ml(30 0 - 16 0 0ml) ,供体的平均住院时间为 12d(6 - 38d)。 14例供体未输血。 1例供体术后发生并发症。移植肝的平均重量为 719g(45 0 - 10 5 0g) ,所有移植肝均立即恢复功能 ,病人精神状态康复 ,凝血酶原时间恢复正常。 2例受体需要再次手术探查。 2例患者死亡 (1例在术后 16d死于全身性念珠菌感染 ,另 1例在术后 2 6d死于门静脉栓塞 )。结论　认为采用右半肝的活体肝移植可以提供足够体积和功能的肝脏达到较好的结果 ,为成年患者的肝移植提供了新的选择