Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Using Left and Right Liver Grafts in Adult-to-adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry.
Hye-Sung Jo, Dong-Sik Kim, Jai Young Cho, Shin Hwang, YoungRok Choi, Jong Man Kim, Jae Geun Lee, Young Kyoung You, Donglak Choi, Je Ho Ryu, Bong-Wan Kim, Yang Won Nah, Man Ki Ju, Tae-Seok Kim, Suk-Won Suh
{"title":"Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Using Left and Right Liver Grafts in Adult-to-adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry.","authors":"Hye-Sung Jo, Dong-Sik Kim, Jai Young Cho, Shin Hwang, YoungRok Choi, Jong Man Kim, Jae Geun Lee, Young Kyoung You, Donglak Choi, Je Ho Ryu, Bong-Wan Kim, Yang Won Nah, Man Ki Ju, Tae-Seok Kim, Suk-Won Suh","doi":"10.1097/TP.0000000000005200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Living-donor liver transplantation has been widely performed as an alternative to the scarce liver grafts from deceased donors. More studies are reporting favorable outcomes of left liver graft (LLG). This study compared the clinical outcomes between living-donor liver transplantation using LLG and right liver graft (RLG) with similar graft-to-recipient body weight ratios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study analyzed 4601 patients from a multicenter observational cohort using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry between 2014 and 2021. After matching the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score and graft-to-recipient body weight ratios because of the extremely different number in each group, the LLG and RLG groups comprised 142 (25.1%) and 423 (74.9%) patients, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For donors, the median age was higher in the LLG group than in the RLG group (34 y [range, 16-62 y] versus 30 y [16-66 y] ; P = 0.002). For recipients, the LLG group showed higher 90-d mortality than the RLG group (11 [7.7%] versus 9 [2.1%]; P = 0.004). The long-term graft survival was significantly worse in the LLG group ( P = 0.011). In multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis for graft survival, LLG was not a significant risk factor (hazard ratio, 1.01 [0.54-1.87]; P = 0.980). Otherwise, donor age (≥40 y; 2.18 y [1.35-3.52 y]; P = 0.001) and recipients' body mass index (<18.5 kg/m 2 ; 2.98 kg/m 2 [1.52-5.84 kg/m 2 ]; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for graft survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the short-term and long-term graft survival was worse in the LLG group, LLG was not an independent risk factor for graft survival in multivariate analysis. LLGs are still worth considering for selected donors and recipients regarding risk factors for graft survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":23316,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation","volume":" ","pages":"e45-e53"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000005200","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Living-donor liver transplantation has been widely performed as an alternative to the scarce liver grafts from deceased donors. More studies are reporting favorable outcomes of left liver graft (LLG). This study compared the clinical outcomes between living-donor liver transplantation using LLG and right liver graft (RLG) with similar graft-to-recipient body weight ratios.
Methods: This study analyzed 4601 patients from a multicenter observational cohort using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry between 2014 and 2021. After matching the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score and graft-to-recipient body weight ratios because of the extremely different number in each group, the LLG and RLG groups comprised 142 (25.1%) and 423 (74.9%) patients, respectively.
Results: For donors, the median age was higher in the LLG group than in the RLG group (34 y [range, 16-62 y] versus 30 y [16-66 y] ; P = 0.002). For recipients, the LLG group showed higher 90-d mortality than the RLG group (11 [7.7%] versus 9 [2.1%]; P = 0.004). The long-term graft survival was significantly worse in the LLG group ( P = 0.011). In multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis for graft survival, LLG was not a significant risk factor (hazard ratio, 1.01 [0.54-1.87]; P = 0.980). Otherwise, donor age (≥40 y; 2.18 y [1.35-3.52 y]; P = 0.001) and recipients' body mass index (<18.5 kg/m 2 ; 2.98 kg/m 2 [1.52-5.84 kg/m 2 ]; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for graft survival.
Conclusions: Although the short-term and long-term graft survival was worse in the LLG group, LLG was not an independent risk factor for graft survival in multivariate analysis. LLGs are still worth considering for selected donors and recipients regarding risk factors for graft survival.
期刊介绍:
The official journal of The Transplantation Society, and the International Liver Transplantation Society, Transplantation is published monthly and is the most cited and influential journal in the field, with more than 25,000 citations per year.
Transplantation has been the trusted source for extensive and timely coverage of the most important advances in transplantation for over 50 years. The Editors and Editorial Board are an international group of research and clinical leaders that includes many pioneers of the field, representing a diverse range of areas of expertise. This capable editorial team provides thoughtful and thorough peer review, and delivers rapid, careful and insightful editorial evaluation of all manuscripts submitted to the journal.
Transplantation is committed to rapid review and publication. The journal remains competitive with a time to first decision of fewer than 21 days. Transplantation was the first in the field to offer CME credit to its peer reviewers for reviews completed.
The journal publishes original research articles in original clinical science and original basic science. Short reports bring attention to research at the forefront of the field. Other areas covered include cell therapy and islet transplantation, immunobiology and genomics, and xenotransplantation.