| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3315664 | Journal of Hepatology | 2006 | 8 Pages |
Background/AimsThis study aims to compare the results of living donor (LDLT), cadaveric split (SLT) and domino (DO) liver transplantation which are currently available alternatives to the conventional cadaveric full-size liver transplantation (CAD).MethodsImmunologic, vascular and biliary complications (BC) were evaluated in 38 LDLT, 20 SLT, 17 DO and 38 CAD recipients.ResultsThe incidence of acute rejection (AR) was similar between groups, and between blood-related and blood-unrelated patients. AR was more severe in the SLT group according to the Banff scores (P=0.03, P<0.001, P<0.001). The evolution of AR was similar between the groups, in terms of development of chronic rejection. No venous complications occurred in the overall population. The rate of arterial thrombosis (10.5, 10, 0 and 3%, respectively) was statistically similar between groups. The rate of BC (26, 40, 12, and 8%, respectively) was higher in the partial grafts than in the whole grafts (P=0.006), but was not significantly different within each group. There was an association between the severity of preservation injury and occurrence of AR (P=0.01) and arterial thrombosis (P=0.016), but not BC. One- and 2-year graft and patient survival rates were similar between groups.ConclusionsNone of the graft types seemed to confer immunological advantage. BC remained problematic in the partial grafts, independently from ischemia time.
