Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2001 Dec;234(6):713-21; discussion 721-2.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-200112000-00002.

Is there still a need for living-related liver transplantation in children?

D C Broering  1 , L Mueller, R Ganschow, J S Kim, E G Achilles, H Schäfer, M Gundlach, L Fischer, M Sterneck, C Hillert, K Helmke, J R Izbicki, M Burdelski, X Rogiers
Affiliations

Is there still a need for living-related liver transplantation in children?

D C Broering et al. Ann Surg. 2001 Dec.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None
Figure 1. Patient survival after living-related liver transplantation (LRT, n = 43) and split-liver transplantation (SLT, n = 49).
None
Figure 2. Graft survival after living-related liver transplantation (LRT, n = 43) and split-liver transplantation (SLT, n = 49).
None
Figure 3. Clearance of total bilirubin after split-liver transplantation (SLT, n = 49) and living-related liver transplantation (LRT, n = 43).
None
Figure 4. Prothrombin time after split-liver transplantation (SLT, n = 49) and living-related liver transplantation (LRT, n = 43).
None
Figure 5. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) corrected by the graft–recipient weight ratio (GRWR) after split-liver transplantation (SLT, n = 49) and living-related liver transplantation (LRT, n = 43). *P < .0001 (Mann-Whitney test).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Emond JC, Whitington PF, Thistlethwaite JR, et al. Reduced-size orthoptic liver transplantation: use in the management of children with chronic liver disease. Hepatology 1989; 5: 867–872. - PubMed
    1. Rogiers X, Broering DC, Mueller L, et al. Living-donor liver transplantation in children. Langenbecks Arch Surg 1999; 384: 528–535. - PubMed
    1. Malago M, Rogiers X, Broelsch CE. Reduced-size hepatic allografts. Ann Rev Med 1995; 46: 507–512. - PubMed
    1. Gridelli B, Remuzzi G. Strategies for making more organs available for transplantation. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 404–410. - PubMed
    1. De Ville de Goyet J, Hausleithner V, Reding R, et al. Impact of innovative techniques on the waiting list and results in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1993; 56: 1130–1136. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances