Long-term Outcomes of Pediatric Living Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- PMID: 34331391
- DOI: 10.1002/lt.26250
Long-term Outcomes of Pediatric Living Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Abstract
Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) emerged in the 1980s as a viable alternative to scarce cadaveric organs for pediatric patients. However, pediatric waitlist mortality remains high. Long-term outcomes of living and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) are inconsistently described in the literature. Our aim was to systematically review the safety and efficacy of LDLT after 1 year of transplantation among pediatric patients with all causes of liver failure. We searched the MEDLINE, Medline-in-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, Embase + Embase Classic (OvidSP), and Cochrane (Wiley) from February 1, 1947 to February 26, 2020, without language restrictions. The primary outcomes were patient and graft survival beyond 1 year following transplantation. A meta-analysis of unadjusted and adjusted odds and hazard ratios was performed using a random-effects model. A total of 24 studies with 3677 patients who underwent LDLT and 9098 patients who underwent DDLT were included for analysis. In patients with chronic or combined chronic liver failure and acute liver failure (ALF), 1-year (odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.88), 3-year (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61-0.89), 5-year (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.89), and 10-year (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-1.00) patient and 1-year (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.70), 3-year (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.83), 5-year (OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.32-0.76), and 10-year (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.49) graft survival were consistently better in LDLT recipients compared with those in DDLT recipients. In patients with ALF, no difference was seen between the 2 groups except for 5-year patient survival (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95), which favored LDLT. Sensitivity analysis by era showed improved survival in the most recent cohort of patients, consistent with the well-described learning curve for the LDLT technique. LDLT provides superior patient and graft survival outcomes relative to DDLT in pediatric patients with chronic liver failure and ALF. More resources may be needed to develop infrastructures and health care systems to support living liver donation.
© 2021 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.
References
-
- Magee JC, Krishnan SM, Benfield MR, Hsu DT, Shneider BL. Pediatric transplantation in the United States, 1997‐2006. Am J Transplant 2008;8(Pt 2):935–945.
-
- Orman ES, Barritt AS, Wheeler SB, Hayashi PH. Declining liver utilization for transplantation in the United States and the impact of donation after cardiac death. Liver Transpl 2013;19:59–68.
-
- Northup PG, Abecassis MM, Englesbe MJ, Emond JC, Lee VD, Stukenborg GJ, et al. Addition of adult‐to‐adult living donation to liver transplant programs improves survival but at an increased cost. Liver Transpl 2009;15:148–162.
-
- Barbetta A, Aljehani M, Kim M, Tien C, Ahearn A, Schilperoort H, et al. Meta‐analysis and meta‐regression of outcomes for adult living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2021;21:2399–2412.
-
- Bourdeaux C, Darwish A, Jamart J, Tri TT, Janssen M, Lerut J, et al. Living‐related versus deceased donor pediatric liver transplantation: a multivariate analysis of technical and immunological complications in 235 recipients. Am J Transplant 2007;7:440–447.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical