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。     

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。     

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.     

成人间活体肝移植肝动脉重建方法和并发症的处理

目的 探讨成人间活体肝移植的肝动脉重建和并发症处理的经验.方法 自2002年1月至2006年7月,共施行50例成人间右半肝活体肝移植.在供受者间肝动脉的重建中,供者右肝动脉与受者右肝动脉吻合24例,与受者肝固有动脉吻合12例,与受者左肝动脉吻合3例,与受者肝总动脉吻合2例,与受者肠系膜上动脉发出的副右肝动脉吻合2例,与受者肝总动脉自体大隐静脉间置搭桥3例.受者腹主动脉与供者右肝动脉自体大隐静脉搭桥2例,用保存的尸体髂血管行受者腹主动脉与供者右肝动脉搭桥2例.供者肝动脉直径1.5～2.5 mm,采用显微外科技术在3.5倍手术放大镜和5～10倍手术显微镜下完成肝动脉重建.结果 50例成人间右半肝活体肝移植中,有2例(4%)分别于术后1d、7d发生肝动脉血栓形成,立即采用自体大隐静脉从肾下腹主动脉至供者右肝动脉搭桥术,恢复供肝血流,痊愈出院.1例术后1.5个月后发生肝动脉血栓形成,随访期无临床症状未行处理.术后和随访期未发现肝动脉狭窄、肝动脉假性动脉瘤等并发症.围手术期未有与肝动脉并发症有关的死亡病例.全部病例获得随访,随访时间2～52个月(中位随访时间9个月),1年实际生存率为92%.结论 选择恰当的肝动脉重建方式和应用显微外科技术可显著降低肝动脉并发症,及时处理肝动脉并发症是保证供肝存活的关键.     

活体右半肝供体的安全性

目的 探讨活体右半肝供体的安全性。方法 对2002年1月至2005年6月施行的13例活体右半肝移植中供体的资料进行回顾性研究。不阻断入肝血流,在肝中静脉右侧,用超声刀离断肝组织得到右半供肝。通过计算得到标准肝体积及残余左半肝的比例。结果 右半供肝切取术平均失血490ml,平均输血440ml。围手术期平均输入人血白蛋白85g。1例供体门静脉分为3支,2例供体右后与右前胆管汇入左肝管,1例左外与左内胆管先后与右肝管汇合成肝总管,术中处理恰当,门静脉左干血流及左肝管胆汁引流保持通畅。2例供肝轻度脂肪变。术后第1天肝功能均有不同程度损害,但术后1周恢复到接近正常水平。术后并发症包括1例腹腔内出血,2例切口脂肪液化和1例乳糜漏。所有供体恢复好并回到原工作岗位。结论 只要保证左半肝血管与胆管通畅,残余肝体积在30％以上及手术对残余肝无大的损伤,右半供肝切取是安全的。     

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.     

改进成人间活体供肝移植的手术技术

目的研究并改进成人间活体供肝移植的手术技术。方法自2002年1月至2005年8月,施行了16例成人间活体右半供肝移植。手术中改进了技术,包括右肝静脉重建、肝中静脉分支搭桥、肝动脉搭桥及胆道吻合等。结果所有供者均无严重并发症及死亡。移植肝与受者重量比（GRWR）为0．72％～1．24％,其中9例〈1．0％,2例〈0．8％。手术除了采用移植肝的右肝静脉与受者下腔静脉（IVC）直接吻合外,5例加行右肝下静脉重建、5例取自体大隐静脉行肝中静脉分支与IVC间搭桥,保证了右肝流出道通畅。最早手术的2例受者中,1例发生肝静脉吻合口狭窄,另1例发生小肝综合征,最终导致死亡。后阶段手术的14例受者均未发生小肝综合征;发生并发症5例,分别为急性排斥反应、肝动脉栓塞、胆漏、左膈下脓肿及肺部感染;1例再次肝移植后因肺部感染,多器官功能衰竭（MOF）死亡。结论活体供肝移植中采用改进的手术技术,特别是肝静脉流出道重建的方法,可有效避免发生小肝综合征。     

Safety of donors in live donor liver transplantation using right lobe grafts

HYPOTHESIS: Right lobe donation was advocated for adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation but the safety of the donor is still a major concern. We hypothesize that right lobe donation is safe if the lowest limit of volume of liver remnant that can support donor survival is known. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively. SETTING: Tertiary hepatobiliary surgery referral center. PATIENTS: Twenty-two live donors involved in adult-to-adult right lobe liver transplantation from May 1996 to June 1999. INTERVENTIONS: The right lobe grafts were obtained by transecting the liver on the left side of the middle hepatic vein. Liver transection was performed by using an ultrasonic dissector, without using the Pringle maneuver. The left lobe volume was measured by computed tomographic volumetry and the ratio of left lobe volume to the total liver volume was calculated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital mortality rate and complication rate. RESULTS: The median blood loss was 719 mL (range, 200-1,600 mL). Only one donor, who had thalassemia, received 1 U of homologous blood transfusion. Postoperative complications included wound infection, incision hernia, and cholestasis in 1 donor whose liver showed 20% fatty change and who had a left lobe-total liver volume of 0.34. Another donor with 15% fatty change in the liver and a left lobe-total liver volume ratio of 0.27 developed prolonged cholestasis. Two other donors with left lobe-total liver volume ratios of 0.27 but with mild steatosis (<5%) did not develop postoperative cholestasis. Postoperative complications also included 1 case of biliary stricture and 1 case of small bowel obstruction. Both complications were adequately treated. There was no donor mortality. All donors are well and have returned to their previous occupations. CONCLUSION: Live donation of right lobe graft for adult-to-adult liver transplantation is safe provided that the residual liver volume exceeds 30% of the total liver volume and the liver itself is normal or only mildly affected by steatosis.     

Regeneration and outcome of dual grafts in living donor liver transplantation

In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the essential aims are to provide an adequate graft volume to the recipient and to keep a sufficient remnant liver volume in the donor. In some instances, these aims cannot be met by a single donor and LDLT using dual grafts from two donors is a good solution. From 2002 to 2009, five recipients in our hospital received dual graft LDLT. Two recipients received one right lobe and one left lobe grafts; the other three received two left lobe grafts. The mean final liver regeneration rate was 91.2%. Left lobe graft atrophy in the long term was observed in recipients who received a right and a left lobe grafts. The initial bigger volume graft in all recipients was noted to have better regeneration than the smaller volume grafts. Portal flow and bilateral grafts volume size discrepancy were considered as two major factors influencing graft regeneration in this study. We also noted that the initial graft volume correlated with portal flow in the separate grafts and finally contribute to individual graft regeneration. Because of compensatory hypertrophy of the other graft, recipients who experienced atrophy of one graft did not show signs of liver dysfunction.     

Right posterior segment graft for living donor liver transplantation: A systematic review

The clinical significance of the right posterior segment (RPS) graft in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is unknown because of its limited use and technical concerns. This study aimed to review published studies investigating outcomes of RPS grafts. The systematic literature search was conducted to retrieve data from Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar. Among the 388 articles, six retrospective studies from Asian countries were included. The overall incidences of major and minor complications after RPS graft procurement were 5.6% and 34.6%, respectively and no donor deaths were reported. RPS graft recipients had the following postoperative complications: overall mortality rate, 14.5%; bile leakage, 8.7%, biliary stenosis, 18.8%, hepatic artery thrombosis, 8.7%, and liver re-transplantation, 2.9%. The RPS graft can be considered as an option for a living liver graft respecting donor safety under strict selection criteria and surgical strategy. The precise evaluation and understanding of anatomical variations and volumetric analyses is critical for selecting donors and planning the surgical strategy in the RPS grafts procurement. The RPS grafts procurement requires carefully dissection of the hepatic artery and portal vein, safely confirmation of the bile duct, and precisely parenchymal transection. However, further experience is needed to clarify the significance of the RPS graft in LDLT. The special technical requirements should limit this donor procedure to centers with a high level of experience in LDLT.     

Interpostion vein graft in living donor liver transplantation

In adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), right lobe grafts without a middle hepatic vein can cause hepatic congestion and disturbance of venous drainage. To solve this problem, various types of interposition vein graft have been used. OBJECTIVES: We used various types of interposition vein grafts for drainage of the paramedian portion of the right lobe in living donor liver transplantation. METHODS: From June 1996 to June 2003, 37 of 176 patients (128 adults, 48 pediatric) who underwent LDLT received vein grafts for drainage of segments V, VIII, or the inferior portion of the right lobe. RESULTS: In 36 adult cases the reconstruction included the inferior mesenteric vein of the donor (n = 14); cadaveric iliac vein stored at cold (4 degrees C) temperature (n = 5); cryopreserved (-180 degrees C) cadaveric iliac vein (n = 10); cryopreserved cadaveric iliac artery (n = 1 case); donor ovarian vein (n = 1); recipient umbilical vein (n = 3); recipient saphenous vein (n = 1); recipient left portal vein (n = 1); recipient left hepatic vein (n = 1). In a pediatric case with malignant hemangioendothelioma that encased and compressed the inferior vena cava, we used an interposition vein graft to replace the inferior vena cava. CONCLUSION: Various types of interposition vein grafts can be used in living donor liver transplantation. Cryopreserved cadaveric iliac vein and artery are useful to solve these drainage problems.     

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.     

活体肝移植治疗HBV相关性急性亚急性肝功能衰竭

目的 探讨活体肝移植(living donor liver transplantation,LDLT)HBV感染导致的急性肝功能衰竭(acute liver failure,ALF)和亚急性肝功能衰竭(subacute liver failure,SALF)患者的可行性,并评价其疗效.方法 回顾性分析2000年11月至2007年10月完成的10例LDLT治疗ALF、SALF患者的临床资料.10例LDLT的供、受者均为成人,切取右半肝为移植物,8例含肝中静脉(middle hepatic vein,MHV).10例供者的评估均在确定实施LDLT的24 h内完成,供、受者手术均在确定供者后的12 h内完成.移植物质量与受者体质量比为(1.03±0.17)%(0.86%～1.22%),移植物体积与受者标准肝体积比为(52.2±11.8)%(47.6%～70.1%).结果 10例受者中,2例分别于术后7、28 d时因肺部感染、十二指肠球部溃疡穿孔腹腔感染死亡.1例胆管吻合口胆漏,经十二指肠镜下置入鼻胆管引流治愈.2例术后1周出现轻度急性排斥反应,增强免疫抑制强度后肝功能恢复正常.8例中位随访期9.6个月(2～84个月),生存质量优良.10例供者中,1例出现急性门静脉高压症导致脾脏破裂,行脾脏切除术,其后出现胆管断端胆漏,经鼻胆管引流结合经皮穿刺腹腔引流治愈.其余9例无并发症发生.结论 LDLT适宜治疗HBV感染导致的ALF、SALF,而且能获得较好的中、远期疗效.     

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.     

Safety and necessity of including the middle hepatic vein in the right lobe graft in adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of donors who have donated the middle hepatic vein in right lobe live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and to determine whether such inclusion is necessary for optimum graft function. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The necessity to include the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft in adult-to-adult LDLT is controversial. Inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in the graft provides uniform hepatic venous drainage but may lead to congestion of segment IV in the donor. METHODS: From 1996 to 2002, 93 right-lobe LDLTs were performed. All right-lobe grafts except 1 contained the middle hepatic vein. In the donor operation, attention was paid to preserve the segment IV hepatic artery and to avoid prolonged rotation of the right lobe. The middle hepatic vein was transected proximal to a major segment IVb hepatic vein whereas possible to preserve the venous drainage in the liver remnant. RESULTS: There was no donor death. Two donors had intraoperative complications (accidental left hepatic vein occlusion and portal vein thrombosis) and were well after immediate rectification. Twenty-four donors (26%) had postoperative complications, mostly minor wound infection. The postoperative international normalized ratio on day 1 was better in the donors with preservation of segment IVb hepatic vein than those without the preservation, but, in all donors, the liver function was largely normal by postoperative day 7. The first recipient had severe graft congestion as the middle hepatic vein was not reconstructed before reperfusion. In 7 other recipients, the middle hepatic vein was found occluded intraoperatively owing to technical errors. The postoperative hepatic and renal function of the recipients with an occluded or absent middle hepatic vein was worse than those with a patent middle hepatic vein. The hospital mortality rate was also higher in those with an occluded middle hepatic vein (3/9 vs. 5/84, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in right-lobe LDLT is safe and is essential for optimum graft function and patient survival.     

Monosegmental living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplant (LDLT) program has been started from 1990 in Japan, and is still major form of liver transplantation because of the scarcity of cadaveric donor organs. In small infants, implantation of left lateral segment grafts can be a problem because of a large-for-size graft. Until November 2002, we performed 867 transplants for 828 patients (561 children and 306 adults), and 14 cases received monosegment grafts from living donors. METHODS: Fifteen patients, median age 211 days, median weights 5.95 kg, received monosegmental LDLT. The indication for using this technique was infants with an estimated graft-to-recipient weight ratio of over 4.0%. RESULTS: Graft and patient survival is 85.7%. There were no differences in donor operation time and blood loss between monosegmentectomy and left lateral segmentectomy. Segment III grafts were indicated in 13 cases. Two vascular complications were observed (one hepatic artery thrombosis and one portal vein thrombosis). CONCLUSIONS: Monosegental living donor liver transplantation is a feasible option with satisfactory graft survival in small babies with liver failure.     

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。     

Donor age in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: We sought to elucidate the influence of donor age in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using either left lobe (LL) or right lobe (RL) grafts. METHODS: Recipients (n = 232) were categorized as: group O/LL (LL, donor age >50, n = 20); group Y/LL (LL, donor age < or =50, n = 140); Group O/RL (RL, donor age >50, n = 12); and group Y/RL (RL, donor age < or =50, n = 61). We compared post-LDLT graft functions. RESULTS: Among LL LDLT, the incidence of small-for-size syndrome was significantly greater for group O/LL compared with group Y/LL (60.0% vs 16.3%, P < .01). However, the cumulative 5-year graft survivals were 73.8% in group O and 76.7% in group Y without substantial difference. In RL LDLT, the post-LDLT morbidity and mortality were similar for group O/RL and group Y/RL. CONCLUSION: Partial liver grafts, even though LL grafts, from older donors can be used safely with caution in LDLT.     

Complications in the right lobe adult living donor: single-center experience in China

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been accepted as an established treatment modality for end-stage liver diseases to alleviate the shortage of cadaveric organs. Reported complication rates for right lobe adult living donors vary, but are estimated to be approximately 35% with a surgical mortality rate of approximately 0.3%. Our objective was to evaluate the complications in right lobe adult living donors in a single center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective review includes 62 adult living donors who underwent right hemi-hepatectomy between January 2002 and December 2006. Eighteen donors were men and 44 were women (range, 18-65 years; median age, 36 years). The mean follow-up time for the donors was 16 months (range, 3 months-4 years). RESULTS: All donors were alive and well at the end of the study period. Complications included pleural effusion (n=6; 9.68%), bile leaks (n=3; 4.84%), wound infection (n=2; 3.23%), pneumonia (n=2; 3.23%), chyle leak (n=1; 1.61%), intra-abdominal bleeding (n=1; 1.61%), subphrenic effusion (n=1; 1.61%), portal vein thrombosis (n=1; 1.61%), and chylothorax (n=1; 1.61%). There was no donor mortality, and the overall complication rate was 29%. CONCLUSIONS: The overall complication rate in the right lobe adult living donor was 29% in our center; there was no donor mortality. These complications could be avoided or overcome through intensive postoperative surveillance.     

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.