Early liver transplantation (LT) in European centers reportedly improved survival in patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis (AH) not responding to medical therapy. Our aim was to determine if a strategy of early LT for severe AH could be applied successfully in the United States. We reviewed 111 patients with severe AH at our center from January 2012 to January 2015. The primary end point was mortality at 6 months or early LT, with a secondary end point of alcohol relapse after LT. Survival was compared between those receiving early LT and matched patients who did not. Using a process similar to the European trial, 94 patients with severe AH not responding to medical therapy were evaluated for early LT. Overall, 9 (9.6%) candidates with favorable psychosocial profiles underwent early LT, comprising 3% of all adult LT during the study period. The 6-month survival rate was higher among those receiving early LT compared with matched controls (89% vs. 11%, p<0.001). Eight recipients are alive at a median of 735 days with 1 alcohol relapse. Early LT for severe AH can achieve excellent clinical outcomes with low impact on the donor pool and low rates of alcohol relapse in highly selected patients in the United States.

Liver transplantation is being performed with excellent 5-year survival. Significant comorbidities exist, however, which appear to be related to long-term immunosuppression.

ObjectiveTo summarize the evolution of a living donor liver transplant program and the authors' experience with 109 cases. Summary Background DataThe authors' institution began to offer living donor liver transplants to children in 1993 and to adults in 1998. MethodsDonors were healthy, ages 18 to 60 years, related or unrelated, and ABO-compatible (except in one case). Donor evaluation was thorough. Liver biopsy was performed for abnormal lipid profiles or a history of significant alcohol use, a body mass index more than 28, or suspected steatosis. Imaging studies included angiography, computed tomography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Recipient evaluation and management were the same as for cadaveric transplant. ResultsAfter ABO screening, 136 potential donors were evaluated for 113 recipients; 23 donors withdrew for medical or personal reasons. Four donor surgeries were aborted; 109 transplants were performed. Fifty children (18 years or younger) received 47 left lateral segments and 3 left lobes; 59 adults received 50 right lobes and 9 left lobes. The average donor hospital stay was 6 days. Two donors each required one unit of banked blood. Right lobe donors had three bile leaks from the cut surface of the liver; all resolved. Another right lobe donor had prolonged hyperbilirubinemia. Three donors had small bowel obstructions; two required operation. All donors are alive and well. The most common indications for transplant were biliary atresia in children (56%) and hepatitis C in adults (40%); 35.6% of adults had hepatocellular carcinoma. Biliary reconstructions in all children and 44 adults were with a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy; 15 adults had duct-to-duct anastomoses. The incidence of major vascular complications was 12% in children and 11.8% in adult recipients. Children had three bile leaks (6%) and six (12%) biliary strictures. Adult patients had 14 (23.7%) bile leaks and 4 (6.8%) biliary strictures. Patient and graft survival rates were 87.6% and 81%, respectively, at 1 year and 75.1% and 69.6% at 5 years. In children, patient and graft survival rates were 89.9% and 85.8%, respectively, at 1 year and 80.9% and 78% at 5 years. In adults, patient and graft survival rates were 85.6% and 77%, respectively, at 1 year. ConclusionLiving donor liver transplantation has become an important option for our patients and has dramatically changed our approach to patients with liver failure. The donor surgery is safe and can be done with minimal complications. We expect that living donor liver transplants will represent more than 50% of our transplants within 3 years.The shortage of cadaveric organs for liver transplantation has limited our ability to provide this life-saving therapy.

The aim of this study is to analyze the impact of the recipient's disease severity on graft size requirements and outcome in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation. A limiting factor in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation has been adequacy of graft size. A minimal graft-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) of 0.8% to 1% has been suggested, without taking the recipient's disease into account. Forty adults underwent liver transplantation using left (n ‫؍‬ 10; mean weight, 481 ؎ 83 g) or right lobes (n ‫؍‬ 30; mean weight, 845 ؎ 182 g). We recorded graft survival, Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, and occurrence of small-for-size syndrome (poor bile production, prolonged postoperative prothrombin time, and cholestasis without ischemia markers). Small grafts were defined as GRWR of <0.85%. Large grafts were defined as GRWR greater than 0.85%. Six patients died within 6 months of transplantation (early patient survival rate, 85%); two patients died late of tumor recurrence. Among transplant recipients with normal liver function or Child's class A, there was no significant difference with the use of small (n ‫؍‬ 6) or large (n ‫؍‬ 9) grafts (graft survival rates, 83% v 88%, respectively; P ‫؍‬ .65). Among patients with Child's class B or C, graft survival rates were 74% in recipients of large grafts (n ‫؍‬ 19) and 33% in recipients of small grafts (n ‫؍‬ 6; P ‫؍‬ .023). Five of 6 patients with Child's class B or C who received small grafts developed small-for-size syndrome; 2 patients died (1 patient after retransplantation) and 3 patients survived (2 patients after retransplantation). Graft function and survival are influenced not only by graft size, but also by pretransplantation disease severity. GRWR as low as 0.6% can be used safely in patients without cirrhosis or in patients with Child's class A. Transplant recipients with Child's class B or C require a GRWR greater than 0.85% to avoid small-for-size syndrome and related complications. (Liver Transpl 2001;7: 948-953.)

Donors did not regret their decision to donate; several felt the experience had changed their lives for the better. Donors scored as well as or better than U.S. norms in general health. Quality of life after donation must remain a primary outcome measure when we consider the utility of living-donor liver transplants.