Donor Mortality Research Articles

Predictive Indicators and Outcomes of Pregnancies Affected by Stage I Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome Treated With Fetoscopic Laser Photocoagulation.

The significance of fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP) in stage I twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) remains controversial. This study aimed to clarify the outcomes and prognostic factors of stage I TTTS after FLP. We conducted a retrospective cohort study on patients with stage I TTTS who underwent FLP in Japan. The primary outcome was neonatal survival at 28days. The adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of pre- and intraoperative factors for mortality in recipient and donor twins were calculated. This study included 272 twin pairs. The survival rate of at least one twin and both twins was 98% (267 pairs) and 85% (232 pairs), respectively. Survival of the recipient twin was observed in 253 cases (93%). No factor was associated with the mortality of the recipients. Among the donor twins, 246 (90%) survived. Preoperative twin anemia-polycythemia sequence (aOR, 17.45; 95% CI, 3.16-96.31) and arterio-arterial vascular anastomosis (AAA) identified at FLP (aOR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.10-7.06) were independently associated with mortality of the donors. The neonatal survival rate for both recipient and donor twins was >90% among patients with stage I TTTS who underwent FLP. AAA is a risk factor for mortality in donors following FLP, though the pathophysiology of AAA remains to be clarified.

The Rochester Protocol for Living Donor Liver Transplantation of Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A 5-Year Report on Selection, Approval, and Outcomes

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a treatment option for select patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastasis. We describe our center’s experience of patient selection, insurance approval, and outcomes after LDLT after first referral in March 2019. Of the 206 evaluated patients, 23 underwent LDLT. We found that patients who were referred earlier in their oncologic course were more likely to be eligible for transplantation. After completion of the Rochester Protocol for LDLT eligibility, recipients had a median delay of care of 10 days (IQR, 0-36 days) related to insurance appeal, with 6 patients (30%) having a delay longer than 30 days. LDLT recipients had an overall survival proportion of 100% and 91% at 1 and 3 years and a recurrence-free survival proportion of 100% and 40% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. All donors underwent right hepatectomy, of which only 1 donor had a Clavien-Dindo IIIa complication and readmission. There was no donor mortality. We assert that multidisciplinary care and strict patient selection through the Rochester Protocol were paramount to our center’s success. In the appropriately selected patient, LDLT for unresectable colorectal liver metastasis may be justified, and patients should be referred to transplant oncology centers for evaluation.

Trends in infectious adverse events after elective optical keratoplasty (PK, EK, and ALK) - Ten years' analysis from an eye bank.

To report the clinical profile and donor characteristics of post-optical keratoplasty adverse events notified at an eye bank. Between January 2013 and December 2022, 37,041 donor corneas were utilized for keratoplasty, of which 16,531 were used for penetrating keratoplasty (PK), 12,171 for endothelial keratoplasty (EK), and 1356 for anterior lamellar keratoplasty (ALK). EK included 10,956 Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and 1215 Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). The adverse events reported within the first 6 weeks of optical keratoplasty were analyzed for donor-related parameters. A total of 41 (0.11%) recipients had post-keratoplasty infections. Of these, 33 occurred after EK (29 after DSAEK, and four after DMEK), two after ALK, and six after PK. The clinical presentation was keratitis alone in 16 eyes and associated with endophthalmitis in 25 eyes. The organisms isolated were gram-negative bacteria in 26 eyes, fungus in eight eyes, gram-positive bacteria in four eyes, mixed infection in five eyes, and microbiology inconclusive in seven eyes. The majority (78%) of the gram-negative infections were due to multidrug-resistant organisms. Most (88%) donor corneas were harvested from hospital premises. The most common cause of donor mortality was trauma. The median duration of presentation from surgery was 4.46 (range: 1-30) days. The death to preservation time was 4.18 (1.5-7.65) hours. The death to utilization time was 3 (2-4.7) days. The overall risk of infectious adverse events after keratoplasty was 0.11%, ranging from 0.08% to 0.36%. Most (80.4%) of the adverse events occurred after EK. The majority (78.9%) of the adverse events were of bacterial etiology, of which gram-negative infections (68.4%) were the most common. The trends and microbiological spectrum of organisms associated with infections should be thoroughly documented in eye banks to gain insights and formulate guidelines on the management of adverse events.

Thirty-Year Trends in Perioperative Mortality Risk for Living Kidney Donors

This study uses a national registry study to characterize temporal trends in perioperative mortality in donors and risk factors associated with this event.

Safety and efficacy of extended thrombophilia screening directed venous thromboembolic events (VTE) prophylaxis in live liver donors: do we really need extended thrombophilia screening routinely?

The study aimed to determine the prevalence of hereditary thrombophilia, and stratify its severity among live liver donors in Pakistan. Also, the authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of thrombophilia profile testing directed venous thromboembolic events (VTE) prophylaxis while balancing bleeding risk and the need for routine thrombophilia testing before live liver donation among living donor candidates. Protein S (PS), protein C (PC), anti-thrombin (AT) III, and anti-phospholipid antibody panel (APLA) levels were measured in 567 potential donor candidates. Donors were divided into normal, borderline and high-risk groups based on Caprini score. The safety endpoints were VTE occurrence, bleeding complications or mortality. Among 567 donors, 21 (3.7%) were deficient in protein C, and 14 (2.5%) were deficient in anti-thrombin-III. IgM and IgG. Anti-phospholipids antibodies were positive in 2/567 (0.4%) and 2/567 (0.4%), respectively. IgM and IgG lupus anticoagulant antibodies were positive in 3/567 (0.5%) and 3/567 (0.5%), respectively. VTE events, bleeding complications and postoperative living donors liver transplantation-related complications were comparable among the three donor groups (P>0.05). One donor in the normal donor group developed pulmonary embolism, but none of the donors in either borderline or high-risk group developed VTE. The mean length of ICU and total hospital stay were comparable. No donor mortality was observed in all donor groups. Due to thrombophilia testing directed VTE prophylaxis, VTE events were comparable in normal, borderline and high-risk thrombophilia donor groups, but more evaluations are required to determine the lower safe levels for various thrombophilia parameters including PC, PS and AT-III before surgery among living donor candidates.

An international survey of venous thromboembolic events and current practices of peri-operative VTE prophylaxis after living donor hepatectomy.

Venous thromboembolic complications are an uncommon but significant cause of morbidity & mortality after live donor hepatectomy . The precise incidence of these events and the current practices of centers performing living donor liver transplantation worldwide are unknown. An online survey was shared amongst living donor liver transplantation centers containing questions regarding center activity, center protocols for donor screening, peri-operative thromboembolic prophylaxis and an audit of -perioperative venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy in the previous five years (2016-2020). Fifty-one centers from twenty countries completed the survey. These centers had cumulatively performed 11500 living donor liver transplants between 2016-2020. All centers included pre-operative l assessment for thromboembolic risk amongst potential liver donors in their protocols. Testing for inherited prothrombotic conditions was performed by 58% of centers. Dual-mode prophylaxis was the most common practice (65%), while eight and four centers used single mode or no routine prophylaxis respectively. Twenty (39%) and 15 (29%) centers reported atleast one perioperative deep venous thrmobosis or pulmonary embolismevent respectively. There was one donor mortality directly related to post-operative pulmonary embolism. Overall incidence of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism events was 3.65 and 1.74 per 1000 live donor hepatectomiesrespectively. Significant variations in center practices and incidence of thromboembolic events was identified in the survey primarily divided along world regions. 75% of participating centers agreed on the need for clear international guidelines. Venous thromboembolicevents after live donor hepatectomy are an uncommon but important cause of donor morbidity. There is significant variation in practice among centers. Evidence-based guidelines regarding risk assessment, and peri-operative prophylaxis are needed.

The incidence of adverse outcome in donors after living donor liver transplantation: A meta-analysis of 60,829 donors.

The scarcity of liver grafts has prompted developments in living donor liver transplantations (LDLT), with previous literature illustrating similar outcomes in recipients compared to deceased donor transplants. However, significant concerns regarding living donor morbidity and mortality have yet to be examined comprehensively. This study aims to provide estimates of the incidence of various outcomes in living liver donors. In this meta-analysis, Medline and Embase were searched from inception to July 2022 for articles assessing the incidence of outcomes in LDLT donors. Complications in the included studies were classified into respective organ systems. Analysis of incidence was conducted using a generalized linear mixed model with Clopper-Pearson intervals. Eighty-seven articles involving 60,829 living liver donors were included. The overall pooled incidence of complications in LDLT donors was 24.7% (CI: 21.6%-28.1%). The incidence of minor complications was 17.3% (CI: 14.7%-20.3%), while the incidence of major complications was lower at 5.5% (CI: 4.5%-6.7%). The overall incidence of donor mortality was 0.06% (CI: 0.0%-0.1%) in 49,027 individuals. Psychological complications (7.6%, CI: 4.9%-11.5%) were the most common among LDLT donors, followed by wound-related (5.2%, CI: 4.4%-6.2%) and respiratory complications (4.9%, CI: 3.8%-6.3%). Conversely, cardiovascular complications had the lowest incidence among the subgroups at 0.8% (CI: 0.4%-1.3%). This study presents the incidence of post-LDLT outcomes in living liver donors, illustrating significant psychological, wound-related, and respiratory complications. While significant advancements in recent decades have contributed towards decreased morbidity in living donors, our findings call for targeted measures and continued efforts to ensure the safety and quality of life of liver donors post-LDLT.

The evolution of liver transplant program in Pakistan and the challenges ahead

Background and aimThe burden of Liver disease has significant implications on the healthcare infrastructure in Pakistan, with viral hepatitis being the leading etiology of end-stage liver disease. Liver transplant remains the only curative treatment option for end-stage liver disease. A decade ago, the liver transplant facility was almost non-existent for the Pakistani population, and the patients with end-stage liver disease had to travel overseas to receive liver transplantation. Gradually, during the last decade the country has progressed steeply and achieved various milestones in living donor liver transplantation. Various public and private sector hospitals are providing liver transplant services nationwide. The study aimed to describe the evolution and success of living donor liver transplant programs in Pakistan. We will also discuss the current practices involved in donor and recipient selection, factors related to non-existent deceased donor organ programs, and the introduction of innovative strategies to overcome the shortage of donor organ pools. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of the first 416 living donor liver transplants (LDLTs) performed at PKLI&RC from March 2019 to April 2023. The stepwise approach for the donor and recipient selection process is described in detail, along with the survival outcomes of LDLT at our center. ResultsAmong the 416 living donor liver transplants performed between March 2019 and April 2023. The Hepatitis C virus was the most common etiology (50.5 %) for chronic liver disease. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was present in 27.9 % of cases. Most donors were offspring of the recipients, with sons accounting for 23 % and daughters for 17.5 % of cases. Only a single (0.24 %) patient had a deceased donor transplant. The annual donor rejection rate was up to 68 % at our center. Nine SWAP transplants were performed to overcome the donor shortage. The Clavien Dindo classification system was used to grade the severity of complications after donor hepatectomy. No donor mortality (grade-5 complication) was observed in our cohort, whereas 1- and 3-year recipient survival rates were 89 % and 88 %, respectively. ConclusionHepatitis C virus remains the most common etiology of chronic liver disease requiring liver transplantation. The major pool of living donations was from first-degree relatives. There was no donor mortality with acceptable 1- and 3-year recipient's survival rates. Living donor liver transplantation is a feasible and safe strategy in regions where cadaveric liver transplant program is limited.

Characteristics of living liver donors in a national referral hospital in Indonesia: a 13-year experience with living donor liver transplantation.

Hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary atresia lead to end-stage liver disease, which requires liver transplantation and is linked to increased mortality. Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital is the national referral center in Indonesia and is the only center that routinely performs living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study presents the characteristics of living liver donors (LLDs) in Indonesia. Using the LDLT registry, we conducted a retrospective analysis of all approved donors from 2010 to 2022. The variables included clinical characteristics of the donors, graft types, and intraoperative and postoperative characteristics. The LDLT rate has increased from 5.8 to 8.8 procedures/year in the last 8 years. The average age of the 76 LLDs was 31.8 years. They were predominantly female (59%) and lived within a family relationship (90%). Pediatric LDLT was more frequent than adult LDLT (88% vs. 12%, respectively). Most grafts (86%) were obtained by left lateral sectionectomy, with a median ratio of remnant liver volume to total liver volume of 79.5% (range, 47.7%-85.8%) and a mean graft-to-recipient weight ratio of 2.65%±1.21%. The median intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) was 2 days (range, 1-5 days) and the total hospital LOS was 7 days (range, 4-28 days). The complication rate was 23%. No donor mortality was reported. LDLT in Indonesia has increased over the years. The shortage of donors for adult-to-adult liver transplantation is due to cultural differences and challenges in finding eligible donors. This study aims to explain the eligibility criteria of LLDs and contribute to creating a national policy.

Donor's ability to comprehend and carefully assess the benefits and risks of donation in living donor liver transplantation: a Pakistani perspective - a short communication.

Patients unlikely to obtain deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) are offered living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) as an alternative. The success of LDLT is bound to the availability of altruistic donors who undergo smooth and safe surgery. Donor morbidity is reported to be up to 20-30%, while donor mortality is only 0.1-0.5%. Globally, LDLT poses numerous ethical concerns regarding living donors, such as autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence. The donor's comprehension of information is a serious issue in LDLT. The donors may underestimate the risk of morbidity and mortality, as well as can ignore the long-term psychological consequences. Furthermore, donor voluntariness may be questionable as the donors may agree to donate under severe family pressure or emotional attachment. We propose open communication with all the donors, ensuring that they should not be subjected to any undue pressure or emotional lability. Donor knowledge and understanding of potential complications and the psychosocial aspect can be augmented by good communication. We also suggest that the donors' education and psychological evaluation should be done in a friendly environment with complete privacy. Interventions should be aimed at improving communication and independent decision-making with the use of e-health educational tools for comprehension assessment.

Improving Safety in Living Liver Donation: Lessons From Intraoperative Adverse Events in 438 Donors Undergoing a Left Liver Resection.

Donor safety is paramount in living organ donation. Left liver resections are considered safer than right lobe hepatectomies. However, unexpected intraoperative adverse events (iAEs), defined as any deviation from the ideal intraoperative course, can also occur during left liver resections and may be life threatening or lead to postoperative complication or permanent harm to the donor and recipient. Records of 438 liver living donors (LDs) who underwent 393 left lateral sectionectomies (LLSs) and 45 left hepatectomies (LHs) between July 1993 and December 2018 in a pediatric living-donor liver transplantation center were reviewed for the appearance of iAEs that could have influenced the donor morbidity and mortality and that could have contributed to the improvement of the LD surgical protocol. Clinical characteristics of LLS and LH groups were comparable. Nine iAEs were identified, an incidence of 2%, all of them occurring in the LLS group. Seven of them were related to a surgical maneuver (5 associated with vascular management and 2 with the biliary tree approach). One iAE was associated with an incomplete donor workup and the last with drug administration. Each iAE resulted in subsequent changes in the surgical protocol. Donor outcome was at risk by 5 iAEs classed as type a, recipient outcome by 2 iAEs (type b) and both by 2 iAEs (type c). Postoperative complications occurred in 87 LDs (19.9%), with no differences between the LLS and LH groups (P = 0.227). No Clavien-Dindo class IVa or b complications or donor mortality (Clavien-Dindo class V) were observed. iAEs debriefings induced changes in our LD protocol and may have contributed to reduced morbidity and zero mortality. iAEs analysis can be used as a quality and safety improvement tool in the context of LD procedures, which may include right liver donation, laparoscopic, and robotic living liver graft procurement.

How the websites of high-volume US centers address the risks of living kidney donation.

The websites of US transplant centers may be a source of information about the renal risks of potential living kidney donors. To include only likely best practices, we surveyed websites of centers that performed at least 50 living donor kidney transplants per year. We tabulated how risks were conveyed regarding loss of eGFR at donation, the adequacy of long-term ESRD risk data, long-term donor mortality, minority donor ESRD risk, concerns about hyperfiltration injury versus the risk of end-stage kidney diseases, comparisons of ESRD risks in donors to population risks, the increased risks of younger donors, an effect of the donation itself to increase risk, quantifying risks over specific intervals, and a lengthening list of small post-donation medical risks and metabolic changes of uncertain significance. While websites had no formal obligation to address donor risks, many offered abundant information. Some conveyed OPTN-mandated requirements for counseling individual donor candidates. While actual wording often varied, there was general agreement on many issues. We occasionally noted clear-cut differences among websites in risk characterization and other outliers. The websites of the most active US centers offer insights into how transplant professionals view living kidney donor risk. Website content may merit further study.

The current landscape of pediatric living donor liver transplantation in the United States: Benefits, challenges, and future directions.

The current landscape of pediatric living donor liver transplantation in the United States: Benefits, challenges, and future directions.

The healthy donor effect and survey participation, becoming a donor and donor career.

The healthy donor effect (HDE) is a selection bias caused by the health criteria blood donors must meet. It obscures investigations of beneficial/adverse health effects of blood donation and complicates the generalizability of findings from blood donor cohorts. To further characterize the HDE we investigated how self-reported health and lifestyle are associated with becoming a blood donor, lapsing, and donation intensity. Furthermore, we examined differences in mortality based on donor status. The Danish National Health Survey was linked to the Scandinavian Donations and Transfusions (SCANDAT) database and Danish register data. Logistic- and normal regression was used to compare baseline characteristics and participation. Poisson regression was used to investigate future donation choices. Donation intensity was explored by the Anderson-Gill model and Poisson regression. Mortality was investigated using Poisson regression. Blood donors were more likely to participate in the surveys, OR=2.45 95% confidence interval (2.40-2.49) than non-donors. Among survey participants, better self-reported health and healthier lifestyle were associated with being or becoming a blood donor, donor retention, and to some extent donation intensity, for example, current smoking conveyed lower likelihood of becoming a donor, OR=0.70 (0.66-0.75). We observed lower mortality for donors and survey participants, respectively, compared with non-participating non-donors. We provide evidence that blood donation is associated with increased likelihood to participate in health surveys, possibly a manifestation of the HDE. Furthermore, becoming a blood donor, donor retention, and donation intensity was associated with better self-reported health and healthier lifestyles.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the trends in corneal donor mortality data from Eye Bank records in India.

To describe the causes and trends of corneal donor mortality from eye bank data in India during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This retrospective eye bank-based study included 13,529 donors who donated their cornea between January 2018 and December 2021. Donors in whom the cause of mortality was documented were included as cases. The data were collected from the eye bank records. Overall, 13,529 corneal donors were included in the study. Most of the donors were males (69.71%). The mean age of the donors was 51.55 ± 20.54 years, whereas the median age was 51 (inter-quartile range: 35-68) years. The mean age of males (49.3 ± 19.47 years) was lesser than the mean age of females (56.72 ± 21.94 years) at the time of donation. The most common age group at the time of donation was during the sixth decade of life with 2,139 (15.81%) donors. The mean age of the donors decreased by a decade from 54.95 ± 20.51 years in 2018 to 44.35 ± 18.88 years in 2021. The most common cause of donor mortality was cardio-respiratory arrest in 5,190 (38.36%) donors and trauma in 3,469 (25.64%) donors, followed by suicide in 2,790 (20.62%) donors. The trend of cardio-respiratory arrest decreased from 53.01% to 9.5% (p = <0.00001), whereas the trends of trauma increased from 21.93% to 36% (p = <0.00001) and suicide increased from 12.71% to 36.41% (p = <0.00001) between 2018 and 2021. Corneal donors are more commonly males in their sixth decade of life. The most common cause of donor mortality was related to cardio-respiratory arrest with a concerning rising trend in suicide cases over the years seen significantly during the pandemic.

Impact of donor age on recipient morbidity and mortality after living donor liver transplantation.

Evidence for use of graft from older donors in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been conflicting. This study aims to clarify the impact of donor age on recipient morbidity and mortality after adult LDLT. A total of 90 live liver donors and recipients who underwent primary adult-to-adult LDLT were divided into three groups according to donor age: donors in 20s (D-20s) group, donors in 30s and 40s (D-30s and 40s) group and donors in 50s & 60s (D-50s and 60s) group. Multivariate analyses were conducted to look for independent risk/prognostic factors. Donor age was analysed as a continuous variable to determine an optimal cut off. Overall donor morbidity was 4/90 (4.44%), major donor morbidity was 1/90 (1.11%) and there was no donor mortality. Recipients in the D-20s group had better 1-, 3- and 5-year recipient survival than recipients in the D-50s and 60s group (96%, 91%, 91% versus 73%, 58%, 58%, respectively) (P=0.020). Donor age was identified to be an independently significant risk factor for increased major complications (P=0.007) and prognostic factor for reduced overall survival (P=0.014). The optimal donor age cut off was determined to be 46.5 years old. Older donors are associated with poorer recipient outcomes after adult-to-adult LDLT. Usage of liver grafts from older donors should be carefully considered when choosing liver grafts for patients undergoing LDLT.

Increasing Living Liver Donor Pools: Liver Paired Exchange Versus ABO-incompatible Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

Increasing Living Liver Donor Pools: Liver Paired Exchange Versus ABO-incompatible Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

Textbook outcome among voluntary donors undergoing major living donor hepatectomy.

PurposeTextbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure of outcome and provides superior assessment of quality of care after surgery. TO after major living donor hepatectomy (MLDH) has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to determine the rate of TO and its associated factors, after MLDH.MethodsThis was a single center retrospective review of living liver donors who underwent MLDH between 2012 and 2021 (n = 1022). The rate of TO and its associated factors was determined.ResultsAmong 1022 living donors (of whom 693 [67.8%] were males, median age 26 [range, 18–54] years), TO was achieved in 714 (69.9%) with no donor mortality. Majority of donors met the cutoffs for individual outcome measures: 908 (88.8%) for no major complications, 904 (88.5%) for ICU stay ≤ 2 days, 900 (88.1%) for hospital stay ≤ 10 days, 990 (96.9%) for no perioperative blood transfusion, 1004 (98.2%) for no 30-day re-admission, and 1014 (99.2%) for no post-hepatectomy liver failure. Early donation era (before streamlining of donor operative pathways) was associated with failure to achieve TO [OR 1.4, CI 1.1–1.9, P = 0.006]. TO was achieved in 506/755 (67%) donors in the early donation era versus 208/267 (77.9%) in the later period (P = 0.001).ConclusionDespite zero mortality and low complication rate, TO was achieved in approximately 70% donors. TO was modifiable and improved with changes in donor operative pathway.

Robotic surgery and liver transplantation: A single-center experience of 501 robotic donor hepatectomies

BackgroundOver the past two decades robotic surgery has been introduced to many areas including liver surgery. Laparoscopic liver surgery is an alternative minimally invasive approach. However, moving on to the complexity of living donor hepatectomies, the advantages of robotic versus laparoscopic approach have convinced us to establish the robotic platform as a standard for living donor hepatectomy. MethodsFrom November 2018 to January 2022, 501 fully robotic donor hepatectomies, including 177 left lateral donor lobes, 112 full left lobes and 212 full right lobes were performed. Grafts were donated to 296 adult recipients and 205 pediatric recipients. Donor age, sex, body weight, body mass index (BMI), graft weight, graft to body weight ratio (GBWR), operative time, blood loss, first warm ischemic time, pain score, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and hospital stay, and complications were retrospectively analyzed based on a prospectively kept database. Recipients were evaluated for graft and patient survival, age, sex, BMI, body weight, model of end-stage liver disease score, blood loss, transfusions, operative time, cold ischemic time, length of hospital stay and complications. ResultsThere was no donor mortality. Two cases needed to be converted to open surgery. The median blood loss was 60 mL (range 20-800), median donor operative time was 6.77 h (range 2.93-11.53), median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range 2-22). Complication rate in donors classified following Clavien-Dindo was 6.4% (n = 32) with one grade III complication. Three-year actual recipient overall survival was 91.4%; 87.5% for adult recipients and 97.1% for pediatric recipients. Three-year actual graft overall survival was 90.6%; 87.5% for adult recipients and 95.1% for pediatric recipients. In-hospital mortality was 6%, 9.1% (27/296) for adult recipients and 1.4% (3/205) for pediatric recipients. The recipients’ morbidity was 19.8% (n = 99). Twenty-eight recipients (5.6%) had biliary and 22 (4.4%) vascular complications. Six (12.0%) recipients needed to be re-transplanted. ConclusionsWith growing experience it is nowadays possible to perform any donor hepatectomy by robotic approach regardless of anatomical variations and graft size. Donor morbidity and quality for life results are encouraging and should motivate other transplant centers with interest in minimally invasive donor surgery to adopt this robotic technique.

Living donor hepatectomy in medium volume liver transplant centre has comparable outcomes to high volume centres: validation of donabedian quality assurance framework.

Given the complexity of living donor hepatectomy, it is expected that high hospital volume will better outcomes. This study aims to evaluate post-operative outcomes for living donor hepatectomy in a medium volume liver transplant centre and compare to outcomes in high volume centres. Also, it serves as a validation tool for framework of structure-process-outcome model for safe living donor hepatectomy program. 204 donors who underwent donor hepatectomy between June 1996 to September 2019 were reviewed retrospectively and compared to outcomes in high volume centres. At 6 months, overall donor morbidity rate was 20/204 (9.8%). Wound complications were most common at 5/204 (2.5%). Majority of complications were either Clavien grade 1 or 2 and only 3 donors had Clavien grade 3 complications. There was zero donor mortality. Our centre's donor morbidity rate of 9.8% is the one of the lowest reported in the published literature. With increased experience, stringent donor selection and enhanced perioperative care by a multi-disciplinary team, outcomes in a medium volume centre can match the outcomes reported in high volume centres. The framework for quality in terms of structure, process and outcomes is presented which can be adopted for developing programs.