Two papers in the present issue explore the value of quantitative liver function tests in living donor transplantation either in both donors and recipients 1 or their recipients. 2 Before discussing the findings of these papers, some basic considerations are in order.
Quantitative liver function tests in donors and recipients of living donor liver transplantation
β Scribed by Christoph Jochum; Mechthild Beste; Volker Penndorf; Marjan Sharifi Farahani; Giuliano Testa; Silvio Nadalin; Massimo Malago; Christoph E. Broelsch; Guido Gerken
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2006
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 132 KB
- Volume
- 12
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1527-6465
- DOI
- 10.1002/lt.20627
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
The unique ability of the liver to regenerate quickly after resection makes living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) possible. This technique uses the unique ability of the liver to regenerate to full size after partial resection. However, the quality and course of this regeneration process in humans are still widely unexplored. In the present study we investigated the quantitative liver function tests galactose elimination capacity (GEC), indocyanine green half-life (ICG), and lidocaine half-life as markers for the quality of the liver regeneration in the first 3 months after LDLT. In this study, 22 consecutive living liver donors and their corresponding recipients were analyzed at baseline and at 10 and 90 days after LDLT. Six recipients lost their grafts during the study period. We compared donors and recipients at the different time points. After LDLT, GEC decreased (-42.6%) and ICG increased (+50.6%) significantly in donors. ICG and GEC remained significantly altered over 3 months in donors with an improvement between days 10 and 90 (GEC, +59.3%; ICG, -9.1%). ICG and GEC improved significantly in recipients between days 10 and 90 (ICG, -63.7%; GEC, +16.3%). The lidocaine half-life showed no significant changes. The donors had better test results and recovered faster than the recipients. In conclusion, after LDLT the parameters for liver capacity and flow remain altered in donors and recipients despite rapid volume growth.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
In living donor liver transplantation, the safety of the donor operation is the highest priority. The introduction of the right lobe graft was late because of concerns about donor safety. We investigated donor liver regeneration by the types of resected segments as well as recipients to assess that
We read with great concern the recent provocative editorial on living related liver transplantation. 1 It raises important issues about the safety of the procedure for the donor. Dr Strong mentions that he ''is aware of at least 6 deaths'' that have occurred with the procedure. Only 1 death has appa
Infectious complications such as bacteremia after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We retrospectively analyzed the frequency and characteristics of posttransplant bacteremia in 181 adult LDLT recipients between April 2006 and November
Living donor liver transplantation is now a common practice in countries in which the availability of cadaveric organs is limited. The preoperative preparation, intraoperative surgical technique, and postoperative care of donors and recipients have evolved in recent years. We retrospectively compare
Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been considered an alternative method for treatment of patients with end-stage liver disease. However, the characteristics of pharmacokinetics of mycophenolic acid (MPA) in patients who underwent LDLT were not clear. This study was designed to compare th