Living donor liver transplantation is a vital option for patients with limited access to deceased donor organs, but its success depends heavily on meticulous preoperative planning and an understanding of vascular anatomy. We present a rare case of hepatic arterial variations with an accessory right hepatic artery originating from the right inferior phrenic artery. Awareness of such anomalies is essential for transplant surgeons and radiologists to ensure optimal graft selection, minimize surgical complications, and improve both donor and recipient outcomes.

The number of organ transplants in South Korea has increased, with a notable rise in living donor transplants. Ensuring their long-term health and well-being is critical to address potential complications and maintain the success of the transplant programs.

A diverse advisory panel, including transplant experts and coordinators, was established to evaluate the follow-up care for living donors. The panel reviewed the results of a brief survey of donors regarding their donation experience, follow-up programs, guidelines, and policies from South Korea and other countries, aiming to identify best practices and recommend improvements.

The study found that follow-up care for living donors in South Korea is inconsistent and lacks standardization. Significant variability exists in follow-up practices across different institutions, and comprehensive data on donor health pre- and post-donation are scarce. The need for continuous, systematic follow-up, encompassing both medical and psychological support, is emphasized to ensure donor well-being.

Improving follow-up care for living donors is essential. Establishing a national registry and increasing donor advocacy teams are meaningful steps to enhance donor care, ensure long-term health, and maintain ethical standards in organ donation.

This study aims to identify and categorize nonmedical barriers encountered by recipients, donors, and health care providers in the context of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Liver transplantation is vital for individuals with liver failure, yet high mortality rates on the transplant waitlist persist. LDLT was introduced to address deceased donor organ shortages; however, its adoption varies widely across regions, prompting the need to explore barriers hindering its implementation. The scoping review employed inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify studies focusing on nonmedical barriers to LDLT in both adult and pediatric populations. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies were considered, covering the period from January 2005 to February 2023. The review's search strategy was conducted in the Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE databases. Studies meeting the criteria were assessed for their characteristics and findings, which were synthesized into recipient, donor, and provider-level barriers. Among 2394 initially screened articles, 17 studies were eligible for inclusion. Recipient-level barriers encompassed systemic disparities in access, limited social support, immigration status, and inadequate awareness of LDLT. Donor-level barriers involved surgery-related risks, recovery time concerns, financial burdens, and religious beliefs. Provider-level barriers highlighted institutional support inadequacies and specialized surgeon shortages. The scoping review underscores nonmedical barriers to LDLT across recipient, donor, and provider levels. These barriers include socioeconomic disparities, information gaps, and inadequate institutional support. The findings underscore the need for comprehensive national efforts to raise awareness about LDLT and provide essential financial support.

Liver transplantation is a critical and evolving field in modern medicine, offering life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease and other hepatic conditions. Despite its transformative potential, transplantation faces persistent challenges, including a global organ shortage, increasing liver disease prevalence, and significant waitlist mortality rates. Current donor evaluation practices often discard potentially viable livers, underscoring the need for refined graft assessment tools. This review explores advancements in graft evaluation and utilization aimed at expanding the donor pool and optimizing outcomes. Emerging technologies, such as imaging techniques, dynamic functional tests, and biomarkers, are increasingly critical for donor assessment, especially for marginal grafts. Machine learning and artificial intelligence, exemplified by tools like LiverColor, promise to revolutionize donor-recipient matching and liver viability predictions, while bioengineered liver grafts offer a future solution to the organ shortage. Advances in perfusion techniques are improving graft preservation and function, particularly for donation after circulatory death (DCD) grafts. While challenges remain-such as graft rejection, ischemia-reperfusion injury, and recurrence of liver disease-technological and procedural advancements are driving significant improvements in graft allocation, preservation, and post-transplant outcomes. This review highlights the transformative potential of integrating modern technologies and multidisciplinary approaches to expand the donor pool and improve equity and survival rates in liver transplantation.

Living donor liver transplant (LDLT) is based on the principle of double equipoise. Organ shortage in Asian countries has led to development of high-volume LDLT programs with good outcomes. Safety of live liver donor is the Achilles heel of LDLT program and every effort should be made to achieve low morbidity and near zero mortality rates.

We retrospectively analyzed our prospectively maintained donor morbidity data (outcomes) of 177 donors in a new transplant program setup in western India by an experienced surgeon. The primary end point was to analyze the morbidity rates and the factors associated with it.

None of the donors in our cohort of 177 donors developed grade IV or V complication (Clavien-Dindo classification). One-fourth (1/4th) of the donors developed complications ranging from grade I to grade III(b). The rate of complications according to modified Clavien-Dindo classification is as follows: (1) grade I in 5.6% (n = 10), (2) grade II in 14.6% (n = 26), (3) grade III(a) in 3.9% (n = 7), (4) grade III(b) in 2.2% (n = 4). Three donors (1.6%) developed post-hepatectomy intra-abdominal bleeding and required re-exploration (grade IIIb). All of them recovered well post-surgery and are doing well in follow-up. The mean follow-up of the entire cohort was 2871 ± 521 days (range 1926-3736 days).

Donor safety (outcome) is determined by meticulous donor surgery and good-quality remnant.

Living donor liver transplantation using hepatic steatosis-improved grafts mitigates donor shortage. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of right-lobe adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation using grafts improved through donor weight loss.

In this retrospective study conducted in a single institution in the Republic of Korea, we reviewed the medical records of living liver donors who lost ≥ 10% of their body weight to improve steatosis before right lobe donation between January 2015 and December 2020. Overall, 1040 right-lobe donors were included, with 150 and 890 donors in the weight loss and control (non-steatosis) groups, respectively.

We performed 1:1 individual matching using the greedy matching method, by which 124 patients were included in each group. The median period from the date of the first visit to donation was 113 (interquartile range: 78-184) days in the weight loss group. As body weight changed from 82.8 ± 13.7 kg to 70.8 ± 11.8 kg (p < 0.0001), body mass index also improved from 27.8 ± 3.9 kg/m2 to 23.8 ± 3.1 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). No significant between-group differences existed in the postoperative laboratory data for living donors and recipients. The incidence of postoperative complications in donors was comparable between the groups (control group, 9.7%; weight loss group, 13.7%; p = 0.3185). The graft and recipient survival rates were comparable between the groups (p = 1.000).

Weight loss through diet and exercise significantly could improve hepatic steatosis in living donor candidates for liver transplantation, with the surgical outcomes in recipients and donors being equivalent to those in recipients and non-steatotic donors.

This is a cross-sectional observational study conducted on living liver donors focusing on "long-term remnant liver health" specifically looking at steatosis, inflammation, and fibrosis using multiparametric ultra sonological evaluation and noninvasive blood tests.

Multiparametric ultrasound evaluation included assessment of shear wave elastography (fibrosis), sound speed plane wave ultrasound, attenuation plane wave ultrasound (steatosis), and viscosity plane wave ultrasound (inflammation). Blood test based APRI and FIB-4 were calculated. Liver biopsy was performed if noninvasive evaluation pointed toward clinically relevant fibro progression (F4).

Out of 36 donors, significant fibrosis (>F2) was found in 11 donors (30.5%), seven donors (19.4%) had severe fibrosis (>F3), and two donors had shear wave elastography values suggestive of cirrhosis(F4). Of these two, one donor was extensively evaluated and was found to have biopsy proven cirrhosis with endoscopic evidence of portal hypertension. The prevalence of fatty liver disease in our study group was 50%.

We report the first liver donor cohort with fibroprogression and cirrhosis occurring in the remnant liver. Our donor cohort with a significant proportion having steatosis and fibroprogression underscores the importance of regular follow-up of liver donors and evaluation of remnant liver.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been proposed in many countries to reduce organ shortage. While the early postoperative outcomes have been well investigated, little is known about the long-term follow-up of the living donors. We, therefore, designed a systematic review of the literature to explore long-term complications and quality of life among living donors. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE registries for studies published since 2013 that specifically addressed long-term follow-up following living-donor liver donation, concerning both physical and psychological aspects. Publications with a follow-up shorter than 1 year or that did not clearly state the timing of outcomes were excluded. A total of 2505 papers were initially identified. After a thorough selection, 17 articles were identified as meeting the eligibility criteria. The selected articles were mostly from North America and Eastern countries. Follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 11.5 years. The most common complications were incision site discomfort (13.2-38.8%) and psychiatric disorders (1-22%). Biliary strictures occurred in 1-14% of cases. Minimally invasive donor hepatectomy could improve quality of life, but long-term data are limited. About 30 years after the first reported LDLT, little has been published about the long-term follow-up of the living donors. Different factors may contribute to this gap, including the fact that, as healthy individuals, living donors are frequently lost during mid-term follow-up. Although the reported studies seem to confirm long-term donor safety, further research is needed to address the real-life long-term impact of this procedure.

To compare graft survival after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients receiving graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) <0.8 versus GRWR≥0.8 grafts and identify risk factors for graft loss using GRWR<0.8 grafts.

Favorable outcomes after LDLT using GRWR<0.8 grafts were recently reported; however, these results have not been validated using multicenter data.

This multicentric cohort study included 3450 LDLT patients. Graft survival was compared between 1:3 propensity score-matched groups and evaluated using various Cox models in the entire population. Risk factors for graft loss with GRWR<0.8 versus GRWR≥0.8 grafts were explored within various subgroups using interaction analyses, and outcomes were stratified according to the number of risk factors.

In total, 368 patients (10.7%) received GRWR<0.8 grafts (GRWR<0.8 group), whereas 3082 (89.3%) received GRWR≥0.8 grafts (GRWR≥0.8 group). The 5-year graft survival rate was significantly lower with GRWR<0.8 grafts than with GRWR≥0.8 grafts (85.2% vs 90.1%, P =0.013). Adjusted hazard ratio for graft loss using GRWR<0.8 grafts in the entire population was 1.66 (95% CI: 1.17-2.35, P =0.004). Risk factors exhibiting significant interactions with GRWR<0.8 for graft survival were age ≥60 years, Model for End-stage Liver Disease score ≥15, and male donor. When ≥2 risk factors were present, GRWR<0.8 grafts showed a higher risk of graft loss compared with GRWR≥0.8 graft in LDLT (hazard ratio 2.98, 95% CI: 1.79-4.88, P <0.001).

GRWR<0.8 graft showed inferior graft survival than controls (85.2% vs 90.1%), especially when ≥2 risk factors for graft loss (among age 60 years or above, Model for End-stage Liver Disease score ≥15, or male donor) were present.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relevant risk factors associated with biliary complications (BCs) in patients with end-stage hepatic alveolar echinococcosis (HAE) following ex vivo liver resection and autotransplantation (ELRA) and to establish and visualize a nomogram model.

This study retrospectively analysed patients with end-stage HAE who received ELRA treatment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University between August 1, 2010 and May 10, 2023. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model was applied to optimize the feature variables for predicting the incidence of BCs following ELRA. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to develop a prognostic model by incorporating the selected feature variables from the LASSO regression model. The predictive ability, discrimination, consistency with the actual risk, and clinical utility of the candidate prediction model were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Internal validation was performed by the bootstrapping method.

The candidate prediction nomogram included predictors such as age, hepatic bile duct dilation, portal hypertension, and regular resection based on hepatic segments. The model demonstrated good discrimination ability and a satisfactory calibration curve, with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.818 (95% CI 0.7417-0.8958). According to DCA, this prediction model can predict the risk of BCs occurrence within a probability threshold range of 9% to 85% to achieve clinical net benefit.

A prognostic nomogram with good discriminative ability and high accuracy was developed and validated to predict BCs after ELRA in patients with end-stage HAE.

The scarcity of liver grafts has prompted developments in living donor liver transplantations (LDLT), with previous literature illustrating similar outcomes in recipients compared to deceased donor transplants. However, significant concerns regarding living donor morbidity and mortality have yet to be examined comprehensively. This study aims to provide estimates of the incidence of various outcomes in living liver donors. In this meta-analysis, Medline and Embase were searched from inception to July 2022 for articles assessing the incidence of outcomes in LDLT donors. Complications in the included studies were classified into respective organ systems. Analysis of incidence was conducted using a generalized linear mixed model with Clopper-Pearson intervals. Eighty-seven articles involving 60,829 living liver donors were included. The overall pooled incidence of complications in LDLT donors was 24.7% (CI: 21.6%-28.1%). The incidence of minor complications was 17.3% (CI: 14.7%-20.3%), while the incidence of major complications was lower at 5.5% (CI: 4.5%-6.7%). The overall incidence of donor mortality was 0.06% (CI: 0.0%-0.1%) in 49,027 individuals. Psychological complications (7.6%, CI: 4.9%-11.5%) were the most common among LDLT donors, followed by wound-related (5.2%, CI: 4.4%-6.2%) and respiratory complications (4.9%, CI: 3.8%-6.3%). Conversely, cardiovascular complications had the lowest incidence among the subgroups at 0.8% (CI: 0.4%-1.3%). This study presents the incidence of post-LDLT outcomes in living liver donors, illustrating significant psychological, wound-related, and respiratory complications. While significant advancements in recent decades have contributed towards decreased morbidity in living donors, our findings call for targeted measures and continued efforts to ensure the safety and quality of life of liver donors post-LDLT.

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Decades of experience supports LDLT as a favorable strategy to reduce waitlist mortality. The multiple regenerative pathways of hepatocytes and other hepatic cells justify the rationale behind it. Nonetheless, living liver donation is still underused and its broader implementation is challenging, mostly due to variability in practices leading to concerns related to donor safety. A non-systematic literature search was conducted for peer-reviewed original articles related to pre-operative evaluation of living liver donor candidates. Eligible studies were synthesized upon consensus for discussion in this up-to-date review. Review of the literature demonstrate that the importance of preoperative assessment of vascular, biliary and liver volume to ensure donor safety and adequate surgical planning for graft procurement is widely recognized. Moreover, data indicates that anatomic variants in vascular and biliary systems in healthy donors are common, present in up to 50% of the population. Therefore, comprehensive mapping and visualizations of each component is needed. Different imaging modalities are reported across practices and are discussed in detail. Lastly, assessment of liver volume must take into account several technical and donor factors that increase the chances of errors in volume estimation, which occurs in up to 10% of the cases. Experience suggests that maximizing donor safety and lessening their risks is a result of integrated experience between hepatobiliary and transplant surgery, along with multidisciplinary efforts in performing a comprehensive pre-operative donor assessment. Although technical advances have increased the accuracy of volume estimation, over- or under-estimation remains a challenge that needs further attention.

In Western countries, deceased donor liver transplantation remains the standard of care for patients with end-stage liver disease. Living donor liver transplantation is a viable and feasible strategy for patients with end-stage liver disease designed to mitigate the deceased organ shortage. Donor safety is the primary concern because liver donors, ideally, should not have any complication. We report a case of middle-aged woman without a history of chronic liver disease who developed autoimmune hepatitis more than 20 years after live liver donation. Changes in these patients' liver enzymes should prompt swift referral to an hepatologist for initial liver disease work-up.

Donor evaluation is a critical step before proceeding with liver transplantation (LT) in both deceased donor LT (DDLT) and living donor LT (LDLT). A good, healthy graft is necessary for the success of the transplantation. Other issues in selecting a donor include the transmission of infections and malignancies from the donor. Because of the scarcity of cadaver organs, an increasing number of extended-criteria donors, or 'marginal donors', are being utilized. LDLT also has potential risks to the donor, and donor safety needs to be kept in mind before proceeding with LT. The current review highlights the factors to be considered during donor evaluation for living and deceased donors before LT.

Venous thromboembolic complications are an uncommon but significant cause of morbidity & mortality after live donor hepatectomy . The precise incidence of these events and the current practices of centers performing living donor liver transplantation worldwide are unknown.

An online survey was shared amongst living donor liver transplantation centers containing questions regarding center activity, center protocols for donor screening, peri-operative thromboembolic prophylaxis and an audit of -perioperative venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy in the previous five years (2016-2020).

Fifty-one centers from twenty countries completed the survey. These centers had cumulatively performed 11500 living donor liver transplants between 2016-2020. All centers included pre-operative l assessment for thromboembolic risk amongst potential liver donors in their protocols. Testing for inherited prothrombotic conditions was performed by 58% of centers. Dual-mode prophylaxis was the most common practice (65%), while eight and four centers used single mode or no routine prophylaxis respectively. Twenty (39%) and 15 (29%) centers reported atleast one perioperative deep venous thrmobosis or pulmonary embolism event respectively. There was one donor mortality directly related to post-operative pulmonary embolism. Overall incidence of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism events was 3.65 and 1.74 per 1000 live donor hepatectomies respectively. Significant variations in center practices and incidence of thromboembolic events was identified in the survey primarily divided along world regions. 75% of participating centers agreed on the need for clear international guidelines.

Venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy are an uncommon but important cause of donor morbidity. There is significant variation in practice among centers. Evidence-based guidelines regarding risk assessment, and peri-operative prophylaxis are needed.

To define benchmark values for adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

LDLT utilizes living-donor hemiliver grafts to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist mortality. Although references have been established for donor hepatectomy, no such information exists for recipients to enable conclusive quality and comparative assessments.

Patients undergoing LDLT were analyzed in 15 high-volume centers (≥10 cases/year) from 3 continents over 5 years (2016-2020), with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Benchmark criteria included a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≤20, no portal vein thrombosis, no previous major abdominal surgery, no renal replacement therapy, no acute liver failure, and no intensive care unit admission. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of all centers' medians.

Of 3636 patients, 1864 (51%) qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs, including posttransplant dialysis (≤4%), primary nonfunction (≤0.9%), nonanastomotic strictures (≤0.2%), graft loss (≤7.7%), and redo-liver transplantation (LT) (≤3.6%), at 1-year were below the deceased donor LT benchmarks. Bile leak (≤12.4%), hepatic artery thrombosis (≤5.1%), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI ® ) (≤56) were above the deceased donor LT benchmarks, whereas mortality (≤9.1%) was comparable. The right hemiliver graft, compared with the left, was associated with a lower CCI ® score (34 vs 21, P < 0.001). Preservation of the middle hepatic vein with the right hemiliver graft had no impact neither on the recipient nor on the donor outcome. Asian centers outperformed other centers with CCI ® score (21 vs 47, P < 0.001), graft loss (3.0% vs 6.5%, P = 0.002), and redo-LT rates (1.0% vs 2.5%, P = 0.029). In contrast, non-benchmark low-volume centers displayed inferior outcomes, such as bile leak (15.2%), hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2%), or redo-LT (6.5%).

Benchmark LDLT offers a valuable alternative to reduce waitlist mortality. Exchange of expertise, public awareness, and centralization policy are, however, mandatory to achieve benchmark outcomes worldwide.

This systematic review aimed to synthesize the literature on factors influencing the quality of life in living liver donors post-donation and to provide a reference for developing targeted interventions in clinical practice.

A systematic search guided by the PRISMA 2020 approach was performed on specific databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINHAL with full text, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses databases. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from inception to October 2022 covering cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies on factors affecting the quality of life of living liver donors after donation were included in this systematic review. The methodological quality of the studies was examined using a modified version of the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool.

A total of 6,576 studies were retrieved, and 16 eligible studies were finally included. Four types of independent influencing factors: sociodemographic (gender, donor age, education, ethnicity, and marital status), donation-related (length of hospital stay and number of hospitalizations/hospital visits related to donation surgery, recipient outcome, time from donation, complications, donation decision, ambivalence about donating, donor-recipient relationship), health-related (body mass index and pre-donation physical symptoms), and psychosocial (pre-donation physical and mental score, household income, anxiety, depression), were extracted from the included studies. Several studies consistently identified old age, recipient death, recent donation, postoperative complications experienced by donors, and donor concerns about their well-being as negative influencing factors on physical function. Female donors, low education levels, longer hospital stays, and/or more hospital visits due to donation, poor recipient outcome, recent donation, pre-donation concerns regarding their well-being, and first-degree relative and spouse/partner donors were reported in several studies as negative predictors for psychological status. Factors affecting social function were considered by only two included articles.

The quality of life of living liver donors could be affected by both donation surgery and psychosocial factors. Based on the above-influencing factors, clinical nurses can develop targeted interventions to improve the quality of life of living liver donors.

This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the acceptability of donor remnant liver volume (RLV) to total liver volume (TLV) ratio (RLV/TLV) being <30% as safe in living donor liver transplantations (LDLTs).

Online databases were searched from January 2000 to June 2022. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects model.

One prospective and seven retrospective studies comprising 1935 patients (164 RLV/TLV <30% vs. 1771 RLV/TLV ≥30%) were included. Overall (OR = 1.82; 95% CI [1.24, 2.67]; p = .002) and minor (OR = 1.88; 95% CI [1.23, 2.88]; p = .004) morbidities were significantly lower in the RLV/TLV ≥30% group than in the RLV/TLV <30% group (OR = 1.82; 95% CI [1.24, 2.67]; p = .002). No significant differences were noted in the major morbidity, biliary complications, and hepatic dysfunction. Peak levels of bilirubin (SMD = .50; 95% CI [.07, .93]; p = .02) and international normalized ratio (SMD = .68; 95% CI [.04, 1.32]; p = .04) were significantly lower in the RLV/TLV ≥ 30% group than in the RLV/TLV <30% group. No significant differences were noted in the peak alanine transferase and aspartate transaminase levels and hospital stay.

Considering the safety of the donor as the top priority, the eligibility of a potential liver donor in LDLT whose RLV/TLV is expected to be <30% should not be accepted.

The practice of LDLT currently delivers limited impact in western transplant centers. The American Society of Transplantation organized a virtual consensus conference in October 2021 to identify barriers and gaps to LDLT growth, and to provide evidence-based recommendations to foster safe expansion of LDLT in the United States. This article reports the findings and recommendations regarding innovations and advances in approaches to donor-recipient matching challenges, the technical aspects of the donor and recipient operations, and surgical training. Among these themes, the barriers deemed most influential/detrimental to LDLT expansion in the United States included: (1) prohibitive issues related to donor age, graft size, insufficient donor remnant, and ABO incompatibility; (2) lack of acknowledgment and awareness of the excellent outcomes and benefits of LDLT; (3) ambiguous messaging regarding LDLT to patients and hospital leadership; and (4) a limited number of proficient LDLT surgeons across the United States. Donor-recipient mismatching may be circumvented by way of liver paired exchange. The creation of a national registry to generate granular data on donor-recipient matching will guide the practice of liver paired exchange. The surgical challenges to LDLT are addressed herein and focuses on the development of robust training pathways resulting in proficiency in donor and recipient surgery. Utilizing strong mentorship/collaboration programs with novel training practices under the auspices of established training and certification bodies will add to the breadth and depth of training.

Limited dead donor pool paved the way for living liver donation so that waitlist mortality could be reduced. With over two decades of experience in the East as well as in the West, right lobe adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation has become an established intervention. The short-term surgical outcomes, complications and health-related quality of life are well known. There is dearth of data on long-term health of remnant liver of donors, especially after a decade of donation.

A 56-year-old lady who donated her right liver lobe 11 years back for her husband with end-stage liver disease. Recipient is doing well till date. She was incidentally found to have thrombocytopenia on follow-up. Her haematological evaluation was negative for blood dyscrasias. Further evaluation demonstrated biopsy-proven cirrhosis with endoscopic evidence of portal hypertension. Aetiological workup was done, which ruled out viral, autoimmune causes as well as Wilson's disease and hemochromatosis. This donor had gained weight post-donation with body mass index of 32.4 kg/m2 and dyslipidaemia. The final diagnosis of fibro progression due to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease was made.

We report the first case of cirrhosis developing in a right lobe living liver donor. While selecting living liver donors, extensive evaluation is done to rule out all potential aetiologies remaining silent but later could lead on to chronic liver disease. Although all other aetiologies, which could induce inflammation and fibrosis, are ruled out at the time of donation, lifestyle liver disease, especially non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, can occur in remnant liver post-donation. This case underscores the importance of regular follow-up of liver donors.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) reduces liver transplant waitlist mortality and provides excellent long-term outcomes for persons with end stage liver disease. Yet, utilization of LDLT has been limited in the United States (US).

In October 2021, the American Society of Transplantation held a consensus conference to identify important barriers to broader expansion of LDLT in the US, including data gaps, and make recommendations for impactful and feasible mitigation strategies to overcome these barriers. Domains addressed encompassed the entirety of the LDLT process. Representation from international centers and living donor kidney transplantation were included for their perspective/experience in addition to members across disciplines within the US liver transplantation community. A modified Delphi approach was employed as the consensus methodology.

The predominant theme permeating discussion and polling results centered on culture; the beliefs and behaviors of a group of people perpetuated over time.

Creating a culture of support for LDLT in the US is key for expansion and includes engagement and education of stakeholders across the spectrum of the process of LDLT. A shift from awareness of LDLT to acknowledgement of benefit of LDLT is the primary goal. Propagation of the maxim "LDLT is the best option" is pivotal.

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplant waitlist and reduce waitlist mortality. We sought to compare donor and recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes after LDLT in the US, the UK, and Canada.

This is a retrospective multicenter cohort-study of adults (≥18-years) who underwent primary LDLT between Jan-2008 and Dec-2018 from three national liver transplantation registries: United Network for Organ Sharing (US), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (UK), and the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada). Patients undergoing retransplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable adjustments were performed using Cox proportional-hazards models with mixed-effect modeling.

A total of 2,954 living donor liver transplants were performed (US: n = 2,328; Canada: n = 529; UK: n = 97). Canada has maintained the highest proportion of LDLT utilization over time (proportion of LDLT in 2008 - US: 3.3%; Canada: 19.5%; UK: 1.7%; p <0.001 - in 2018 - US: 5.0%; Canada: 13.6%; UK: 0.4%; p <0.001). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 92.6%, 82.8%, and 70.0% in the US vs. 96.1%, 89.9%, and 82.2% in Canada vs. 91.4%, 85.4%, and 66.7% in the UK. After adjustment for characteristics of donors, recipients, transplant year, and treating transplant center as a random effect, all countries had a non-statistically significantly different mortality hazard post-LDLT (Ref US: Canada hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.05; UK hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.59-2.02, p = 0.78).

The use of LDLT has remained low in the US, the UK and Canada. Despite this, long-term survival is excellent. Continued efforts to increase LDLT utilization in these countries may be warranted due to the growing waitlist and differences in allocation that may disadvantage patients currently awaiting liver transplantation.

This multicenter international comparative analysis of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada demonstrates that despite low use of the procedure, the long-term outcomes are excellent. In addition, the mortality risk is not statistically significantly different between the evaluated countries. However, the incidence and risk of retransplantation differs between the countries, being the highest in the United Kingdom and lowest in the United States.

Selecting an optimal donor for living donor liver transplantation is crucial for the safety of both the donor and recipient, and hepatic steatosis is an important consideration. We aimed to build a prediction model with noninvasive variables to evaluate macrovesicular steatosis in potential donors by using various prediction models. The study population comprised potential living donors who had undergone donation workup, including percutaneous liver biopsy, in the Republic of Korea between 2016 and 2019. Meaningful macrovesicular hepatic steatosis was defined as >5%. Whole data were divided into training (70.5%) and test (29.5%) data sets based on the date of liver biopsy. Random forest, support vector machine, regularized discriminant analysis, mixture discriminant analysis, flexible discriminant analysis, and deep neural network machine learning methods as well as traditional logistic regression were employed. The mean patient age was 31.4 years, and 66.3% of the patients were men. Of the 1652 patients, 518 (31.4%) had >5% macrovesicular steatosis on the liver biopsy specimen. The logistic model had the best prediction power and prediction performances with an accuracy of 80.0% and 80.9% in the training and test data sets, respectively. A cut-off value of 31.1% for the predicted risk of hepatic steatosis was selected with a sensitivity of 77.7% and specificity of 81.0%. We have provided our model on the website (https://hanseungbong.shinyapps.io/shiny_app_up/) under the name DONATION Model. Our algorithm to predict macrovesicular steatosis using routine parameters is beneficial for identifying optimal potential living donors by avoiding superfluous liver biopsy results.

Platelets are anucleate fragments mainly involved in hemostasis and thrombosis, and there is emerging evidence that platelets have other nonhemostatic potentials in inflammation, angiogenesis, regeneration and ischemia/reperfusion injury (I/R injury), which are involved in the physiological and pathological processes during living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). LDLT is sometimes associated with impaired regeneration and severe I/R injury, leading to postoperative complications and decreased patient survival. Recent studies have suggested that perioperative thrombocytopenia is associated with poor graft regeneration and postoperative morbidity in the short and long term after LDLT. Although it is not fully understood whether thrombocytopenia is the cause or result, increasing platelet counts are frequently suggested to improve posttransplant outcomes in clinical studies. Based on rodent experiments, previous studies have identified that platelets stimulate liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy. However, the role of platelets in LDLT is controversial, as platelets are supposed to aggravate I/R injury in the liver. Recently, a rat model of partial liver transplantation (LT) was used to demonstrate that thrombopoietin-induced thrombocytosis prior to surgery accelerated graft regeneration and improved the survival rate after transplantation. It was clarified that platelet-derived liver regeneration outweighed the associated risk of I/R injury after partial LT. Clinical strategies to increase perioperative platelet counts, such as thrombopoietin, thrombopoietin receptor agonist and platelet transfusion, may improve graft regeneration and survival after LDLT.

The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between hepatic steatosis (HS), determined by biopsy, and visceral adiposity, measured by computed tomography (CT), in overweight or obese potential living liver donors, and to investigate the risk factors for overweight or obese nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

This retrospective study included 375 overweight or obese (body mass index ≥23 kg/m²) potential living liver donors (mean age, 30.4 ± 9.5 years; 273 men) who underwent liver biopsies and abdominal CT examinations in 2017 and 2018. Anthropometry, laboratory parameters, body composition, and HS were assessed. Correlations were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, and logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of overweight or obese NAFLD.

Visceral fat area (VFA) was positively correlated with the degree of HS in men (r = 0.307; P < .001) and women (r = 0.387; P < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that alanine aminotransferase (odds ratio [OR], 1.017; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.033; P = .033) and VFA (OR, 1.015; 95% CI, 1.008-1.022; P < .001) were independent risk factors for overweight or obese NAFLD in men, and VFA (OR, 1.029; 95% CI, 1.011-1.047; P = .002) was an independent risk factor for overweight or obese NAFLD in women.

Visceral adiposity was positively correlated with the degree of HS in overweight or obese potential living liver donors. Additionally, visceral adiposity may be an independent risk factor for overweight or obese NAFLD in potential living liver donors.

Donor death is the most serious complication of living liver donation but is reported rarely. We investigated the actual mortality of living liver donors (LLDs) compared with matched control groups based on analysis of the Korean National Health Insurance Services (NHIS) database.

This cohort study included 12,372 LLDs who donated a liver graft between 2002 and 2018, and were registered in the Korean Network for Organ Sharing. They were compared to 3 matched control groups selected from the Korean NHIS and comprising a total of 123,710 individuals: healthy population (Group I); general population without comorbidities (Group II); and general population with comorbidities (Group III).

In this population, 78.5% of living liver donors were 20-39 years old, and 64.7% of all donors were male. Eighty-nine donors (0.7%) in the LLD group died (68 males and 21 females), a mortality rate (/1,000 person-years) of 0.91 (0.74-1.12). Mortality rate ratio and the adjusted hazard ratio of the LLD group was 2.03 (1.61-2.55) and 1.71 (1.31-2.25) compared to Control Group I, 0.75 (0.60-0.93) and 0.63 (0.49-0.82) compared to Control Group II, and 0.58 (0.46-0.71) and 0.49 (0.39-0.60) compared to Control Group III. LLD group, depression, and lower income were risk factors for adjusted mortality. The incidence of liver failure, depression, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, brain infarction, brain hemorrhage, and end-stage renal disease in the LLD group was significantly higher than in Control Group I.

Outcomes of the LLD group were worse than those of the matched healthy control group despite the small number of deaths and medical morbidities in this group. LLDs should receive careful medical attention for an extended period after donation.

The incidence of mortality, liver failure, depression, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, brain infarction, brain hemorrhage, and end-stage renal disease in the living liver donor group was significantly higher than in the matched healthy group. Careful donor evaluation and selection processes can improve donor safety and enable safe living donor liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation (LT) has emerged as the best therapeutic modality for end-stage liver disease in pediatric autoimmune liver disease (AILD). We aimed to describe our experience of pediatric living donor liver transplantation for AILD from India over a period of 10 years. We did a retrospective analysis of 244 liver transplants at our center over the last 10 years to identify children with AILD (18 years or younger). We aimed to describe the demographic features, clinical profile, graft survival, patient outcome, and predictors of mortality in our cohort. Between July 2010 and May 2020, 13 liver transplants were performed for AILD out of total 244 children transplanted over the last 10 years at our center. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age at LT was 12 (± 3.84) years. Leading indications for LT were decompensated liver disease (61.5%), acute-on-chronic liver failure (23.1%), acute liver failure (ALF) (7.7%), and recurrent cholangitis and growth failure (7.7%). Mean Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease (PELD) score/model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and international normalized ratio (INR) (SD) at presentation were 24 (± 12.81) and 2.48 (± 1.54), respectively. Median discharge duration was 23 days (interquartile range [IQR] 21-36 days). 30.7% (4/13) of the subjects had no postoperative complications. Diarrhea (15.3%), pneumonia (7.7%), jejunostomy site bleed (7.7%), tacrolimus toxicity (7.7%), and vascular complications (7.7%) were seen, which resolved with satisfactory graft function. Three subjects died post-LT; causes of death included sepsis (n=3), renal dysfunction (n=1), and pneumonia (n=1). Others have been well on follow-up with no graft rejection or need for re-transplantation. Overall, 1-year and 5-year patient survival rates were 76.9% and 70%, respectively. Lower platelet count, autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) 2, and PELD/MELD score were found to be significant predictors of mortality on univariate analysis, which were not significant on multivariate modelling. The complications, graft and patient survival rates in our experience were quite encouraging, and are comparable with the best centers worldwide. After instituting appropriate treatment, early referral of such patients to an equipped center should be facilitated.

Low perioperative platelet count is a powerful independent risk factor for posthepatectomy liver failure. Usually, categorical effect of thrombocytopenia was taken into account; upper thresholds were not studied in depth, exclusively in living liver donors.

Living liver donors who underwent right hepatectomy were included. Preoperative characteristics of donors were identified and examined to predict posthepatectomy liver failure. To eliminate selection bias, one-to-one propensity score matching was performed.

There were a total of 139 living donors and 40 (29%) donors developed posthepatectomy liver failure in the aftermath of the operation. Remnant liver volume ratio and preoperative platelet count were identified as adjustable independent risk factors (OR: 0.89 and 0.99, 95% CI: 0.79-0.99 and 0.98-0.99, respectively). After propensity score matching, odds ratio of preoperative platelet count was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98-1.00).

Preoperative platelet count, in addition to remnant liver volume ratio, can be used as a surrogate marker to predict the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure in living liver right lobe donors. Probability curves figured out from logistic regression analysis, in this regard, provided an explicit perspective of platelets having a decisive role on liver donor safety. Thus, remaining in safer remnant liver volume ratio limits with respect to preoperative platelet count should be addressed in safe donor selection strategies.

This study aimed to determine the factors associated with resolution of nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) after lifestyle intervention in potential living liver donors as assessed by the gold standards in a longitudinal setting. This retrospective study included 115 potential living liver donors (mean age, 30.5 ± 7.5 years; 101 men) with NAFL who underwent paired liver biopsies and abdominal computed tomography (CT) examinations before and after lifestyle intervention between January 2011 and December 2018. Anthropometry, laboratory parameters, body composition, and hepatic steatosis (HS) were evaluated before and after lifestyle intervention. Anthropometry, laboratory parameters, body composition, and HS were significantly decreased after lifestyle intervention (all, P < 0.001). Relative changes in HS were weakly correlated with relative changes in the visceral fat area (VFA; r = 0.278; P = 0.003) and subcutaneous fat area (r = 0.382; P < 0.001), but not with body weight, body mass index, or skeletal muscle area. Patients with resolved NAFL after lifestyle intervention had significantly lower VFA at follow-up than those with persistent NAFL (mean ± standard deviation, 69.8 ± 39.1 versus 91.5 ± 41.4 cm² ; P = 0.01). Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the relative reduction of VFA (odds ratio per percent, 1.031; 95% confidence interval, 1.010-1.053; P = 0.004) was a significant independent factor associated with resolved NAFL after lifestyle intervention. In potential living liver donors with NAFL, the reduction of VFA is a significant factor associated with the resolution of NAFL after lifestyle intervention.

Obesity and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are rampant in South East Asia. There is paucity of data exploring its' impact on donor suitability for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We aimed to describe and examine the factors related to non-utilization of potential donors in our LDLT programme.

This is an analysis of prospectively collected data on potential donors for an adult LDLT programme, between January 2017 and December 2019.

Fifty-five donors for 33 potential recipients were evaluated. The mean age was 31.6 ± 8.5 years, 52.7% were female and the ethnic divisions were: Chinese (50.9%), Indian (25.5%) and Malay (23.6%). The mean body mass index (BMI) among potential donors was 25.1 ± 4.0 kg/m²; 25.5% of donors had normal BMI, 23.6% were overweight and 50.9% were obese. Using the CAP modality of Fibroscan®, we identified the following grades of hepatic steatosis: 36.6% S0, 19.5% S1, 2.4% S2 and 41.5% S3. The non-utilization rate of our donors was 74.5% (41/55) and the main reasons were significant hepatic steatosis and/or obesity. Compared to suitable donors, unsuitable donors had significantly greater mean BMI, mean CAP scores, higher rates of dyslipidaemia and NAFLD.

NAFLD and obesity represent major challenges to an emerging LDLT programme in Malaysia.

We aimed to evaluate changes in hepatic volume and hemiliver volume percentage in potential liver donors after hepatic steatosis (HS) reduction through lifestyle modification.

Fifty liver donor candidates with HS (macrovesicular fat [MaF] ≥ 20%) underwent abdominal computed tomography (CT) and liver biopsy before (baseline) and after (follow-up) lifestyle modification. According to the change in MaF, subjects were classified as group A (MaF reduction ≥ 20%, n = 25), and group B (MaF reduction < 20%, n = 25). The hepatic volume and hemiliver volume percentage were measured using CT volumetric analysis.

Volume percentage of the left hemiliver + S1 (over the whole liver) significantly increased at follow-up in group A (P < 0.001) but not in group B (P = 0.598). The absolute volume change of the right hemiliver and its percentage change from the baseline were significantly greater than those of the left hemiliver + S1 in group A (P < 0.007). There were no significant differences in these values in group B (P = 0.064 and 0.507, respectively). The percentage of subjects that earned the benefit of becoming suitable donors from the change in hepatic volume distribution caused by HS improvement was 52.0% (13/25) and 40.0% (10/25) in group A and group B, respectively. Regarding posthepatectomy liver failure, none was identified in group A after donation, whereas 12% (3/25) was identified in group B.

Hepatic volume profile may change considerably in potential liver donors with HS (MaF ≥ 20%) after HS reduction through lifestyle modification. Reevaluation of the hepatic volume is required before liver procurement after lifestyle modification in these subjects.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is increasing, yet gaps exist in the understanding of psychological wellbeing of donors after liver transplant. This meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for donor-related depression after liver transplantation.

A search was conducted on Medline and Embase database. Articles assessing incidence of depression in LDLT donors were included. Incidence was pooled after Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. For risk factors, dichotomous variables were analyzed with generalized linear model while a conventional meta regression with logit transformation was conducted for continuous variables.

Of 1,069 abstracts, 40 articles underwent full-text review. 17 articles were included. The pooled incidence of depression among 1,888 LT donors was 7.66% (CI: 4.47% - 12.80%). Depression rates were significantly higher in Asian compared to Western studies (RR: 1.73, CI: 1.19 - 2.52, p=0.0039). Female gender (p<0.001), Caucasian ethnicity (p=0.047), employment status (p<0.001) and lower education levels (p=0.044) were significantly associated with depression. Donor relationship with recipients was not a significant risk factor.

LDLT remains a core aspect of the treatment of end-stage liver disease. However, the high depression rates after LT suggest that there remains room for improvement in the care of donors' mental health post-transplant.

Criteria that drive the selection and utilization of living liver donors are limited. Herein, the global availability of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and components of donor selection and utilization were assessed via an international survey. There were 124 respondents representing 41 countries, including 47 from Asia/Middle East (A/ME), 20 from Europe, and 57 from the Americas. Responses were obtained from 94.9% of countries with ≥10 LDLT cases/year. Most centers (82.3%) have defined donor age criteria (median 18-60 years), while preset recipient MELD cutoffs (median 18-30) were only reported in 54.8% of programs. Overall, 67.5% of programs have preset donor BMI (body mass index) ranges (median 18-30), and the mean acceptable macrosteatosis was highest for A/ME (20.2 ± 9.2%) and lowest for Americas (16.5 ± 8.4%, P = 0.04). Americas (56.1%) and European (60.0%) programs were more likely to consider anonymous donors versus A/ME programs (27.7%, P = 0.01). There were no differences in consideration of complex anatomical variations. Most programs (75.9%) perform donor surgery via an open approach, and A/ME programs are more likely to use microscopic arterial reconstruction. Despite variations in practice, key aspects of living donor selection were identified. These findings provide a contemporary reference point as LDLT continues to expand into areas with limited access to liver transplantation.

This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) measured using transient elastography (TE) for assessing macrovesicular steatosis (MaS) in potential living liver donors using same-day biopsy as a reference standard.

This retrospective study included 204 living liver donor candidates who underwent TE and liver biopsy on the same day between July 2013 and June 2014. The histologic degree of MaS was determined. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to evaluate the performance of CAP for diagnosing MaS of >10%, and the optimal cutoff value was identified using the maximal Youden index.

Based on liver biopsy, 185 subjects had MaS of ≤10% and 19 had MaS of >10%. The CAP value was significantly correlated with the percentage of MaS on liver biopsy (r=0.635, P<0.001), and the median CAP value was significantly higher in subjects with MaS of >10% than in those with MaS of ≤10% (300 dB/m vs. 209 dB/m, P<0.001). The AUROC for diagnosing MaS of >10% by CAP was 0.938 (95% confidence interval, 0.896 to 0.967), and a CAP of >259 dB/m yielded a sensitivity of 84.2% and a specificity of 92.4%.

The CAP measured using TE was significantly correlated with MaS and accurately detected substantial MaS in potential living liver donors. The CAP is a promising tool for the noninvasive diagnosis of MaS and may be used to screen unsuitable living liver donor candidates.