Patients considering living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) need to know the risk and severity of complications compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). One aim of the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) was to examine recipient complications following these procedures. Medical records of DDLT or LDLT recipients who had a living donor evaluated at the nine A2ALL centers between 1998 and 2003 were reviewed. Among 384 LDLT and 216 DDLT, at least one complication occurred after 82.8% of LDLT and 78.2% of DDLT (p = 0.17). There was a median of two complications after DDLT and three after LDLT. Complications that occurred at a higher rate (p < 0.05) after LDLT included biliary leak (31.8% vs. 10.2%), unplanned reexploration (26.2% vs. 17.1%), hepatic artery thrombosis (6.5% vs. 2.3%) and portal vein thrombosis (2.9% vs. 0.0%). There were more complications leading to retransplantation or death (Clavien grade 4) after LDLT versus DDLT (15.9% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.023). Many complications occurred more commonly during early center experience; the odds of grade 4 complications were more than twofold higher when centers had performed ≤20 LDLT (vs. >40). In summary, complication rates were higher after LDLT versus DDLT, but declined with center experience to levels comparable to DDLT.

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) reports indicate that mortality on the intestine transplant waiting list is higher than on other transplant waiting lists. The goals of this study were (1) to determine whether most of the intestinal transplant candidate deaths have occurred in those who also need liver transplants, and (2) to compare the waiting list mortality in the liver-intestine candidate subset with the overall liver transplant candidate population. We found that 90% of intestine transplant waiting list deaths have occurred in candidates who also needed liver transplants. Since 1994, annual mortality has been higher in liver-intestine transplant candidates than in the overall liver transplant candidate population, and these differences have been statistically significant since 1996. These mortality differences applied to all age groups. Also, status 2B, 3, and 7 candidate mortality was significantly higher in liver-intestine candidates than in the overall liver transplant candidate population. Because there were so few liver-intestine transplant candidates listed as status 1 or 2A, a meaningful comparison was not possible in these statuses. These data indicate that liverintestine transplant candidates are a unique subset of liver transplant candidates with a significantly higher risk of dying on the waiting list. Recent changes in UNOS liver allocation policy that gives higher priority to liver-intestine candidates may help to reduce this discrepancy. However, further research into the etiology of liver disease in patients on long-term parenteral nutrition and earlier referral of high-risk short bowel syndrome patients to centers with special expertise in their management are needed for an ultimate solution to this problem. (Liver Transpl 2003;9:748-753.)