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
Comparative Study
. 2015 Jan;21(1):72-8.
doi: 10.1002/lt.24033.

Clinical outcomes of and patient satisfaction with different incision methods for donor hepatectomy in living donor liver transplantation

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Clinical outcomes of and patient satisfaction with different incision methods for donor hepatectomy in living donor liver transplantation

Suk-Won Suh et al. Liver Transpl. 2015 Jan.
Free article

Abstract

With the decrease in the average donor age and the increase in the proportion of female donors, both donor safety and cosmetic appearance are major concerns for some living donors in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) because a large abdominal incision is needed that may influence the donor's quality of life. In all, 429 donors who underwent donor hepatectomy for LDLT from April 2010 to February 2013 were included in the study. Donors were divided into 3 groups based on the type of incision: conventional inverted L incision (n = 268; the C group), upper midline incision (n = 147; the M group), and transverse incision with laparoscopy (n = 14; the T group). Demographics, perioperative outcomes, postoperative complications for donors and recipients, and questionnaire-derived donor satisfaction with cosmetic appearance were compared. The mean age was lower (P < 0.001), the female ratio was higher (P < 0.001), and the body mass index (BMI) was lower (P = 0.017) in the M and T groups versus the C group. The operation time (P < 0.001) and the hospital stay duration (P = 0.010) were lowest in the M group. The postoperative complications did not differ by the type of incision and also did not show any significant effect in a multivariate analysis (P = 0.867). In the assessment of questionnaire-derived donor satisfaction matched by age (±5 years), sex, graft, height, weight, and BMI, a more satisfactory cosmetic result and more self-confidence were noted in the M and T groups versus the C group. In conclusion, the use of a minimal incision is technically feasible for some donor hepatectomy cases with a favorable safety profile. The patient satisfaction levels were greater with improved cosmetic outcomes in cases of minimal incision versus cases of conventional incision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources