Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Small-for-Size Grafts: Does Size Really Matter?

Abstract

In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR)>0.8% is perceived as the critical graft size. This lower limit of GRWR (0.8%) has been challenged over the last decade owing to the surgical refinements, especially related to inflow and outflow modulation techniques. Our aim was to compare the recipient outcome in small-for-size (GRWR<0.8) versus normal-sized grafts (GRWR>0.8) and to determine the risk factors for mortality when small-for-size grafts (SFSG) were used. Data of 200 transplant recipients and their donors were analyzed over a period of two years. Routine practice of harvesting middle hepatic vein (MHV) or reconstructing anterior sectoral veins into neo-MHV was followed during LDLT. Outcomes were compared in terms of mortality, hospital stay, ICU stay, and occurrence of various complications such as functional small-for-size syndrome (F-SFSS), hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), portal vein thrombosis (PVT), and postoperative sepsis. A multivariate analysis was also done to determine the risk factors for mortality in both the groups. Recipient and donor characteristics, intraoperative variables, and demographical data were comparable in both the groups (GRWR<0.8 and GRWR≥0.8). Postoperative 90-day mortality (15.5% vs. 22.85%), mean ICU stay (10 vs. 10.32 days), and mean hospital stay (21.4 vs. 20.76 days) were statistically similar in the groups. There was no difference in postoperative outcomes such as occurrence of SFSS, HAT, PVT, EAD, or sepsis between the groups. Thrombosis of MHV/reconstructed MHV was a risk factor for mortality in grafts with GRWR<0.8 but not in those with GRWR>0.8. Graft survival after LDLT using a small-for-size right lobe graft (GRWR<0.8%) is as good as with normal grafts. However, patency of anterior sectoral outflow by MHV or reconstructed MHV is crucial to maintain graft function when SFSG are used.