Split-liver transplantation with pediatric donors: a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of split-liver transplantation (SLT) with pediatric donors have never been specifically reported. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study on SLT using donors younger than 15 years was conducted. Thirty-nine split-liver procedures generating a left lateral segment (LLS) and an extended right graft (ERG) were performed. In three cases, no recipient was found for ERG. In all but one case, the celiac trunk was maintained with LLS. Data were available for 67 grafts (90% of the total): 38 LLSs and 9 ERGs transplanted into 46 children and 20 ERGs transplanted into 20 adults. Sixty-two (93%) grafts were used for primary transplants and five (7%) for retransplantation. SLT were performed with 15 donors 10 years of age and less and with 24 between 11 and 15 years. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 24 months. Two-year patient and graft survival were 87% and 82%. Patient and graft survivals were not significantly different between pediatric and adult recipients, between recipients from donors 10 years of age and less and those between 11 and 15 years, and between recipients of LLS and ERG. Arterial complications occurred in 6% of cases (8% in the < or = 10 year donors group, 5% in the 11-15 year donors group). The incidence of other complications was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: SLT with pediatric donors, even younger than 10 years, provided results comparable with those achievable using adult donors. The similar incidence of arterial complications among patients receiving LLS or ERG suggests that maintenance of the celiac trunk with LLS is not detrimental for right-sided grafts.     

Long-term outcome of split liver transplantation using right extended grafts in adulthood: A matched pair analysis

OBJECTIVE: Shortage of suitable organs led to the development of alternative techniques in liver transplantation. Split liver transplantation (SLT) is well established in pediatric patients. SLT is not completely accepted in adult recipients due to potential increased risk of complications. Despite satisfying results of short-term outcome, there is a leak on information of the long-term outcome. Therefore, we compared the outcome after transplantation of the right extended liver lobe with whole liver transplantation (WLT) using a matched pair's analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the period of January 1993 to February 2005, 70 SLT recipients were matched with 70 WLT recipients of whole livers. Matching criteria were: 1) indication for transplantation, 2) United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status, 3) recipient age, 4) donor age, 5) cold ischemic time, and 6) year of transplantation. The outcome was analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 36 months. The 2- and 5-year patient survival rates after SLT and WLT were 86.3% and 82.6%, and 78.4% and 75.6%, respectively (log rank, P = 0.2127). Two- and 5-year graft survival rates were 77.3% and 77.3% after SLT and 71.9% and 65.8% after WLT, respectively (log rank, P = 0.3822). The total biliary complication rate was 11.4% in the SLT group versus 10.0% in the WLT group in the short-term course, while it was 8.5% after SLT and 10.0% after WLT in the long-term course. We did not observe significant differences between the groups in term of short- and long-term morbidity. CONCLUSION: Transplantation of the right extended lobe deriving from left lateral splitting of deceased donor livers is followed by the same long-term patient and graft survival, which is known from WLT. There were no differences in the complication rates even in long-term outcome implementing that SLT does not put the adult recipient to an increased early and late risk. Transplantation of the extended right liver lobe provides a safe and efficient procedure in adult patients to expand the number of available grafts.     

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.     

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.     

In situ split liver transplantation for adult and pediatric recipients: an answer to organ shortage

BACKGROUND: We report our initial experience with in situ split liver transplantation (SLT) for adult and pediatric patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From June 2003 to August 2005, 177 liver transplantations in 165 patients, 133 adults (81%) and 32 children (19%), were performed at our institution. Over this period, 45 liver transplantations (25%) were performed with an in situ split liver technique in 44 patients: 17 (39%) were adults and 27 (61%) children. All of the adult split liver recipients were transplanted with an extended right graft (ERG; segments I + IV-VIII), while pediatric recipients received in 23 cases a left lateral segment (LLS; segments II-III) and in 4 cases an ERG from a pediatric donor. The 45 split liver grafts (21 ERGs and 24 LLSs) were generated from 35 donors. In 10 cases we used both grafts generated with an in situ split procedure to transplant our patients, while in 25 cases the procurement procedure was performed in collaboration with other transplant centers. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 9 months (range, 1-27 months), the overall patient survival rate was 88% for adult patients and 82% for pediatric patients. Graft survivals were 88% and 79%, respectively. Two adult patients (12%) died from sepsis in the early postoperative period. Five children (18%) died after their transplantations. Only one pediatric recipient (2%) of primary SLT underwent retransplantation. Vascular complications were absent in adult recipients, whereas 4 arterial (14%) and 4 venous (14%) complications developed in the pediatric population. The incidence of biliary complications was 23% in adult and 18% in pediatric recipients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of in situ SLT for adult and pediatric populations allowed us to expand the cadaveric donor pool, significantly eliminating pediatric waiting list mortality without penalizing the adult population.     

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.     

Split and whole liver transplantation outcomes: a comparative cohort study.

A specific split liver transplantation (SLT) program has been pursued in the North Italian Transplant program (NITp) since November 1997. After 5 yr, 1,449 liver transplants were performed in 7 transplant centers, using 1,304 cadaveric donors. Whole liver transplantation (WLT) and SLT were performed in 1,126 and 323 cases, respectively. SLTs were performed in situ as 147 left lateral segments (LLS), 154 right trisegment liver (RTL) grafts, and 22 modified split livers (MSL), used for couples of adult recipients. After a median posttransplant follow-up of 22 months, SLTs achieved a 3-yr patient and graft survival not significantly different from the entire series of transplants (79.4 and 72.2% vs. 80.6 and 74.9%, respectively). Recipients receiving a WLT or a LLS showed significantly better outcomes than patients receiving RTL and MSL (P < 0.03 for patients and P < 0.04 for graft survival). At the multivariate analysis, donor age of >60 yr, RTL transplant, <50 annual transplants volume, urgent transplantation (United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status I and IIA), ischemia time of >7 hours, and retransplantation were factors independently related to graft failure and to significantly worst patient survival. Right grafts procured from RTL and either split procured as MSL had a similar outcome of marginal whole livers. In conclusion, in 5 yr, the increased number of pediatric transplants due to split liver donation reduced to 3% the in-list children mortality, and a decrease in the adult patient dropout rate from 27.2 to 16.2% was observed. Such results justify a more widespread adoption of SLT protocols, organizational difficulties not being a limit for the application of such technique.     

Split-liver transplantation eliminates the need for living-donor liver transplantation in children with end-stage cholestatic liver disease

BACKGROUND: End-stage cholestatic liver disease (ESCLD) is the main indication for liver replacement in children. Pediatric cadaver-organ-donor shortage has prompted the most important evolutions in the technique of liver transplantation, in particular living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and split-liver transplantation (SLT). METHODS: Between November 1997 and June 2001, 127 children with ESCLD were evaluated for liver transplantation, and 124 underwent 138 liver transplantations after a median time of 40 days. Causes of liver disease were congenital biliary atresia (n=96), Alagille's syndrome (n=12), Byler's disease (n=8), and other cholestatic diseases (n=8). RESULTS: Ninety (73%) patients received a split-liver graft, 28 (23%) a whole liver, and 6 (4%) a reduced-size liver. Overall 2- and 4-year patient survival rates were 93% and 91%, respectively; the 2- and 4-year graft-survival rates were 84% and 80%, respectively. In split-liver recipients, 4-year patient and graft-survival rates were 91% and 83%, respectively; these were 93% and 78%, respectively, in whole-liver recipients and 67% and 63%, respectively, in reduced-size liver recipients. Retransplantation rate was 11%, whereas mortality rate was 8%. Overall incidence of vascular and biliary complication were 16% and 27%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SLT can provide liver grafts for children with ESCLD with an outcome similar to the one reported following LDLT, eliminating mortality while they are on a transplantation wait list. The need for pediatric LDLT should be reevaluated and programs of SLT strongly encouraged and supported at a national and international level.     

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.     

Comparative study between living and cadaveric donors in pediatric liver transplantation

We examined whether the results in living-related hepatic transplantation (LRLT) are better than those from a cadaveric donor (CDLT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The last 27 consecutive LRLT, performed from 1998 to 2005, were compared with 27 CDLT matched for age, weight, date, and diagnosis. Grafts in LRLT group were left lateral segment (n = 22), left lobe (n = 3), and right lobe (n = 2). In the CDLT group, the grafts were split in situ (n = 10), hepatic reduction (n = 9) and whole liver (n = 8). We analyzed the actuarial survivals (grafts and children), retransplantation, primary nonfunction, initial graft malfunction (liver enzymes >2000 U/L), surgical complications, rejection, and resource consumption. RESULTS: Patient survivals at 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years were 100%, 96%, and 96% in LRLT and 100%, 100%, and 100% in CDLT (P = NS). Graft survivals were 93%, 89%, and 89% versus 96%, 96%, and 96%, respectively (P = NS). Complications were biliary complications (LRLT, 25% vs CDLT, 3%; P = .021); portal vein thrombosis (LRLT, 7% vs CDLT, 3%; NS), and hepatic artery thrombosis (LRLT, 0% vs CDLT, 3%; NS). The overall incidence of acute rejection was slightly higher (NS) in LRLT (LRLT, 18% vs CDLT, 11%; NS). Liver enzyme levels were higher in the CDLT group, but initial malfunction rate was not statistically different. Regarding resource consumption: blood product needs were higher in LRLT (P < .05) and hospital stay and ICU stay were longer, although not significantly, among LRLT. CONCLUSIONS: The results in LRLT among children are similar to those obtained in CDLT. We found a trend towards less initial graft malfunction in LRLT. Blood product needs were higher in LRLT. Hospital and ICU stay were longer, but not significantly different in LRLT. The benefits of LRLT are saving a scarce resource: a cadaveric donor liver graft.     

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.     

Liver transplantation in children weighting less than 6 kg: the Bergamo experience

Liver transplantation (OLT) remains a major medical and surgical challenge in small patients. From October 1997 through July 2004, 17 babies less than 6 kg underwent 18 OLTs. Median age and weight were 3 months (range = 1 to 9) and 4.7 kg (range = 2.2 to 5.8). Two whole, one reduced, and 15 split-liver grafts (left lateral segments) were obtained from donors of median age and weight of 11.6 years (range = 0.5 to 62) and 50 kg (range = 7 to 63). Donor-to-recipient median weight ratio (D/R) was 9.1 kg (range = 1.3 to 17.6) and median graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 5% (range = 3.1 to 10). The incidence of biliary complications was 23%. The only vascular complication was a portal vein thrombosis (6%). Fourteen patients (79%) are alive with good graft function at a median follow-up of 39 months (range = 0.5 to 74). Three patients (all status 1) died on postoperative day 285 (brain death), 17 (multiorgan failure), and 229 (cardiovascular failure during retransplantation). Actuarial patient survivals at 6 months and 6 years are 94% and 78% while graft survivals are 89% and 74%, respectively. Currently all the patients listed as UNOS status 2 and 3 (73%) at the time of transplant are alive. During the same period one premature neonate (1.8 kg) who presented with fulminant hepatic failure died on the waiting list after 12 days. Our data confirm that the extensive use of a split-liver technique from small adult or pediatric cadaveric donors can offer the benefits of liver transplantation to small pediatric candidates with excellent results.     

Split liver transplantation and risk to the adult recipient: analysis using matched pairs

BACKGROUND: The technique of liver splitting is an effective way of increasing the donor pool and reducing pediatric waiting list mortality. But the procedure is still not fully accepted because of concerns that it may cause complications in adult recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-nine adult recipients of primary extended right split liver transplantations (SLTs) were matched to recipients of whole liver transplantations (WLTs) according to the following criteria: 1) United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status, 2) donor age, 3) recipient age, 4) total cold ischemic time, 5) indication for liver transplantation, 6) Child-Pugh class, and 7) year of transplantation. A WLT-recipient match was identified in 40 adult recipients of primary SLT. RESULTS: Fifteen percent of the recipients in our study were highly urgent cases (UNOS 1), and 85% were UNOS status 3-4. The 3- and 12-month patient survival rates after SLT and WLT were 82.5% and 77.1%, and 92.5% and 87.5%, respectively (log rank p = 0.358). The 3- and 12-month graft survival rates showed no significant difference in either group (80% and 74% in SLT and 87.5% and 77.4% in WLT [log rank p = 0.887]). The rates of primary nonfunction, primary poor function, biliary and vascular complications, intra- and postoperative blood transfusion, and intensive care stay were comparable for SLT and WLT. CONCLUSIONS: SLT, using the extended right hepatic lobe, does not notably differ from WLT with regard to initial graft function, postoperative complications, or patient and graft survival. Based on this, the liver can be considered a paired organ, and mandatory splitting of good-quality livers can be recommended.     

Incidence and Outcome of Small-for-Size Liver Grafts Transplanted in Adult Recipients

Small-for-size liver transplantation (SFS-LT) carries high morbidity and mortality after transplantation. SFS-LT is usually associated with living-donor or deceased-donor split LT; however its incidence and outcome are poorly defined in adult LT recipients who receive whole grafts (WLT). In this study, we retrospectively reviewed our cohort of 3,106 deceased-donor LT in adult recipients. We found that among the 31 split LTs, 11 (35.5%) were SFS. In contrast, there only 1.08% of the whole-graft transplants (31 out of 2,868) were SFS. Although less common, SFS-WLT is associated with poorer long-term outcome of both graft and patient survivals.     

Transplantation of single pediatric kidneys into adult recipients

AIM: To evaluate the outcome of single pediatric kidneys transplanted into adult recipients. METHODS: A retrospective single-center review was performed of transplants from donors less than 5 years of age. Outcomes were compared with recipients of grafts from donors 18 to 45 years transplanted during the same time period. RESULTS: Thirty single renal transplants from pediatric donors and 117 transplants from adult donors between 18 and 45 years of age were performed during the study period. The mean age of the pediatric donors was 2.9 +/- 0.8 years versus 31.5 +/- 8.9 years for adult donors (P < .001). The mean age of the recipients of pediatric donors was 41.9 +/- 13 years versus 48 +/- 12.6 years for recipients of adult grafts (P = .020). The mean recipient weight of pediatric donors was 55.9 +/- 7.8 kg versus 78.0 +/- 17.7 kg for recipients of adult donors (P < .001). Sixty-six percent of pediatric donor recipients were of female gender compared to only 36% of adult donor recipients (P = .005). Death-censored actuarial graft survivals at 1 and 4 years for recipients of pediatric donor grafts were 90% and 85% compared to 93% and 85% for recipients of adult donor grafts (P = NS). The mean calculated creatinine clearances of adult donor graft recipients at 1 and 4 years posttransplantation were 70.8 +/- 26.5 and 73.7 +/- 27.2 mL/min, respectively, compared to 50.3 +/- 20.1 and 56.3 +/- 21.4 mL/min for pediatric donor grafts (P < .01 at 1 and 4 years). CONCLUSION: The use of single pediatric donor kidneys provides an excellent opportunity to safely expand the donor pool.     

Is There Still a Need for Living-related Liver Transplantation in Children?

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the value of split-liver transplantation (SLT) and living-related liver transplantation (LRT). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The concept of SLT results from the development of reduced-size transplantation. A further development of SLT, the in situ split technique, is derived from LRT, which itself marks the optimized outcome in terms of postoperative graft function and survival. The combination of SLT and LRT has abolished deaths on the waiting list, thus raising the question whether living donor liver transplantation is still necessary. METHODS: Outcomes and postoperative liver function of 43 primary LRT patients were compared with those of 49 primary SLT patients (14 ex situ, 35 in situ) with known graft weight performed between April 1996 and December 2000. Survival rates were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 35 months, actual patient survival rates were 82% in the SLT group and 88% in the LRT group. Actual graft survival rates were 76% and 81%, respectively. The incidence of primary nonfunction was 12% in the SLT group and 2.3% in the LRT group. Liver function parameters (prothrombin time, factor V, bilirubin clearance) and surgical complication rates did not differ significantly. In the SLT group, mean cold ischemic time was longer than in the LRT group. Serum values of alanine aminotransferase during the first postoperative week were significantly higher in the SLT group. In the LRT group, there were more grafts with signs of fatty degeneration than in the SLT group. CONCLUSIONS: The short- and long-term outcomes after LRT and SLT did not differ significantly. To avoid the risk for the donor in LRT, SLT represents the first-line therapy in pediatric liver transplantation in countries where cadaveric organs are available. LRT provides a solution for urgent cases in which a cadaveric graft cannot be found in time or if the choice of the optimal time point for transplantation is vital.     

Twenty seven years of experience in pediatric liver transplantation in Strasbourg: focus on the ex situ split techniques

INTRODUCTION: Despite the well-known controversies about split-liver procedures, since 1979 we have utilized an ex situ instead of an in situ technique because of its feasibility. However, we sought to prove the equality of the results of these two procedures. Herein, we have presented our experience after 27 years' follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 1979 and June 2006, we transplanted 84 livers in 67 pediatric recipients including 37 ex situ split livers implanted into 28 patients. RESULTS: We recorded demographic characteristics, transplantation, and retransplantation indications, age difference between donors and recipients, comorbidities, cold ischemia times, surgical times and complications, graft/recipient body weight ratios, organ recovery times, and overall survivals after 1, 5, and 15 years follow-up. We have herein reported 1, 5, and 15 years of patient versus organ survivals of 88.9.1%, 84.5%, 62.1% versus 78.6%, 74.2%, 57.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We have concluded that an ex situ split liver may be a valid alternative to in situ techniques to achieve good grafts for pediatric transplantation.     

Liver progenitor cells activated after 30% small-for-size liver transplantation in rats: a preliminary study

AIM: To explore whether liver progenitor cells were activated after 30% small-for-size liver transplantation in rats. METHODS: 200 rats were arranged in three groups: 70% partial hepatectomy (PH), whole liver transplantation (WLT), and 30% liver transplantation (SLT) group. On days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 after operation, 6 rats were sacrificed in each group at each time. One week survivals were analyzed; while liver injury and regeneration index were estimated by serum ALT AST, H&E staining and proliferating cell nuclear antigen index. The oval cell markers, including CD90 and OV6, were detected in liver sections by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The 50% survival rate of the SLT group was significantly lower than those of the PH and the WLT groups. At each time after operation, the serum ALT and AST were much higher in the SLT group. Compared with the PH group on days 1, 2, and 3 postoperatively, the PCNA indices were lower among the SLT group. OV-6 positive and CD90 positive cells were detected in the SLT group from day 2 postoperatively. These progenitor cells were first dispersed in the liver but restricted to the periportal region over the following days. CONCLUSION: Liver progenitor cell activation after SLT may be related to the liver dysfunction caused by a small-for-size graft.     

In situ splitting of the cadaveric liver for two adult recipients.

BACKGROUND: Split-liver transplantation offers a unique opportunity to expand the existing donor pool. However, it has previously been stated that due to inadequate liver volume the advantages of split-liver transplantation would be lost when attempting to split the liver for two adult recipients. In this study, we sought to determine the safety, efficacy, and applicability of split-liver transplantation in select adult liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Liver allografts for eight adult recipients were procured by in situ splitting of four adult cadaveric livers. The donor ages were 17, 19, 22, and 25 years and weights were 72, 77, 78, and 87 kg, respectively. In situ splitting resulted in three right trisegmental grafts, one right lobe graft, one left lobe graft, and three left lateral segmental grafts. The median recipient age was 49 years (range 38-61 years), whereas the median recipient weight was 84 kg (range 78-98 kg) for the right-sided grafts and 52 kg (range 51-53 kg) for recipients of the left-sided grafts. The median graft-to-recipient body weight ratio for right trisegmental, right lobe, left lobe, and left lateral segmental grafts was 1.31%, 1.26%, 1.35%, and 0.70%, respectively. RESULTS: Overall patient and graft survival in this series is 100%. All prothrombin times were normalized within 4 days of transplantation. No evidence of ascites or prolonged hyperbilirubinemia was encountered in any right- or left-sided graft recipient. The incidence of hepatic artery, portal vein, and hepatic vein thrombosis is 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. Hepatic arterial anastomotic bleeding and a cut surface bile leak each occurred in one patient. Median United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) waiting time was 242 days (range 4-454 days) for the patients to which the donor liver was allocated. In contrast, the median waiting time for the four patients receiving the extra split-liver graft was reduced significantly to 37 days (range 21-101 days) (P<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that split-liver transplantation can expand the cadaveric donor liver pool available for select adult liver transplant recipients. When both the donor organ and the transplant recipient are chosen carefully, split-liver transplantation can be safely performed without a delay in allograft function, increase in technical complications, or compromise in graft or patient survival.