Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been reported to have high rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence compared with deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). This has been assumed to be due to the frequent use of small-for-size grafts (SFSGs) in LDLT rather than DDLT, but the relationship between graft size and prognosis remains controversial. This study aimed to clarify the effect of SFSGs on the oncologic outcomes of patients with HCC who underwent LDLT. Between January 2005 and December 2015, 597 consecutive patients underwent LDLT. Among these patients, those with HCC who underwent LDLT were randomly matched at a 1:3 ratio (graft-to-recipient body weight ratio [GRWR] < 0.8%:GRWR > 0.8%) according to propensity score. HCC recurrence and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. In addition, stratified subgroup analysis based on the Milan criteria was performed. SFSG was defined as a GRWR < 0.8%. Using propensity score matching, 82 patients with GRWR < 0.8% and 246 patients with GRWR 0.8% were selected. For patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference of HCC recurrence (P 5 0.82) and patient survival (P 5 0.95) was found based on GRWR. However, for patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 52.4%, 49.3%, and 49.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR < 0.8%, and 76.5%, 68.3%, and 64.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR 0.8% (P 5 0.049). The former group exhibited poor patient survival rates (P 5 0.047). In conclusion, for patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference in oncologic outcomes was found based on liver graft size. However, among the patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, SFSG recipients showed poor oncologic outcomes. Because extended criteria are frequently used in LDLT for HCC, a recipient's prognosis can be improved if a liver graft of appropriate size is carefully selected during donor selection.
Liver Transplantation 24 35-43 2018 AASLD.Received May 24, 2017; accepted August 27, 2017. Although living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was initiated because of the shortage of deceased donor livers, it was accepted as an established method of treatment for end-stage liver diseases in the 1990s. The first LDLT was performed to transplant the left lateral section of the liver from a mother to a child with biliary atresia in 1989. (1)(2)(3) After the mid-1990s, right lobe LDLT started to be performed on adult recipients with high metabolic demands, and significant improvements in the outcomes were observed.A major limitation of LDLT is the size of the liver graft that can be obtained safely from living donors. Small-for-size grafts (SFSGs) cannot appropriately deal with the portal flow in the recipient due to decreased liver volume. Shear stress caused by transient portal hypertension can cause acute mechanical injury, which then induces severe inflammatory responses to negatively affect the outcomes of liver transpla...