Abstract
Introduction
Orthotopic liver transplantation has become a routinely applied therapy for an expanding group of patients with end-stage liver disease. Shortage of organs has led centers to expand their criteria for the acceptance of marginal donors. There is current debate about the regulation and results of liver transplantation using marginal grafts.
Methods
The study included data of all patients who received deceased donor liver grafts between March 2007 to December 2011. Patients with acute liver failure, living donor transplantation, split liver transplantation, and retransplantation were excluded. Early allograft dysfunction, primary nonfunction, patient survival, and incidence of surgical complications were measured.
Results
A total of 33 patients were enrolled in this study. There were 20 marginal and 13 nonmarginal grafts. The two groups were well matched regarding age, sex and indication of liver transplantation, model for end-stage liver disease score, technique of transplant, requirement of vascular reconstruction, warm ischemia time, blood loss, mean operative time, etc. In our study, posttransplant peak level of liver enzymes, international normalization ratio, and bilirubin were not statistically significant in the marginal and nonmarginal group. Wound infection occurred in 10 % of marginal compared with 7.7 % of nonmarginal graft recipients (p > 0.05). In the marginal group, the incidences of vascular complications, hepatic artery thrombosis (four), and portal vein thrombosis (one) were not statistically significant compared to the nonmarginal group. Acute rejection was observed in a total of seven patients (21.2 %)—five (25 %) in the marginal group and two (15.4 %) in the nonmarginal graft recipients. Primary nonfunction occurred in three (9.1 %) patients—two (10 %) in the marginal and one (7.7 %) in the nonmarginal group. Average patient survival for the whole group was 91 % at 1 week, 87.8 % at 3 months, and 84.8 % at 6 months.
Conclusion
Because organ scarcity persists, additional pressure will build to use a greater proportion of the existing donor pool. The study, although small, clearly indicates that marginal livers can assure a normal early functional recovery after transplantation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Briceño J, Solórzano G, Pera C. A proposal for scoring marginal liver grafts. Transpl Int. 2000;13:249–52.
Olthoff KM, Kulik L, Benjamin S, et al. Validation of a current definition of early allograft dysfunction in liver transplant recipients and analysis of risk factors. Liver Transpl. 2010;16:943–9.
Deschenes M, Belle SH, Krom RA, Zetterman RK, Lake JR. Early allograft dysfunction after liver transplantation: a definition and predictors of outcome. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Liver Transplantation Database. Transplantation. 1998;66:302–10.
Mor E, Klintmalm GB, Gonwa TA, Solomon H, Holman MJ, Gibbs JF. The use of marginal donors for liver transplantation: a retrospective study of 365 liver donors. Transplantation. 1992;53:383–6.
Ploeg RJ, D’Alessandro AM, Hoffmann RM, Eckhoff D, Isaacs R, Knechtle SJ. Impact of donor factors and preservation on function and survival after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 1993;25:3031–3.
Ploeg RJ, d’Allessandro AM, Knechtle SJ, et al. Risk factors for primary dysfunction after liver transplantation—a multivariate analysis. Transplantation. 1993;55:807–13.
Marino IR, Starzl TE, Aldrighetti L, et al. Risk factors and predictive indexes of early graft failure in liver transplantation. Ital J Gastroenterol. 1996;28:163–8.
Annual report of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network: transplant data 1989–2008. http://www.optn.org/data/annualReport.asp. Accessed June 10, 2010
Gastaca M, Valdivieso A, Pijoan J, et al. Donors older than 70 yrs in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2005;37:3851–4.
Wall WJ, Mimeault R, Grant DR, Bloch M. The use of older donor livers for hepatic transplantation. Transplantation. 1990;49:377–84.
Busuttil RW, Tanaka K. The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2003;9:651–63.
Gonzalez FX, Rimola A, Grande L, et al. Predictive factors of early postoperative graft function in human liver transplantation. Hepatology. 1994;20:565–73.
Ardite E, Ramos C, Rimola A, Grande L, Fernandez-Checa JC. Hepatocellular oxidative stress and initial graft injury in human liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 1999;31:921–7.
Strasberg SM, Howard TK, Molmenti EP, Hertl M. Selecting the donor liver: risk factors for poor function after orthotopic liver transplantation. Hepatology. 1994;20:829–38.
Markin RS, Wisecarver JL, Radio SJ, et al. Frozen section evaluation of donor livers before transplantation. Transplantation. 1993;56:1403–9.
Maring JK, Klompmaker IJ, Zwaveling JH, et al. Poor initial graft function after orthotopic liver transplantation: can it be predicted and does it affect outcome? An analysis of 125 adult primary transplantations. Clin Transplant. 1997;11:373–9.
Bacchella T, Galvao FHF, de Almedia JLJ, Figueria ER, de Moraes A. Marginal grafts increase early mortality in liver transplantation. Sao Paulo Med J. 2008;126(3):161–5. doi:10.1590/s1516-31802008000300005. Accessed July 7, 2010.
Pokorny H, Langer F, Herkner H, et al. Influence of cumulative number of marginal donor criteria on primary organ dysfunction in liver recipients. Clin Transplant. 2005;19:532–6.
Attia M, Silva MA, Mirza DF. The marginal liver donor—an update. Transpl Int. 2008;21:713–24.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Godara, R., Naidu, C.S., Rao, P.P. et al. Use of marginal grafts in deceased donor liver transplant: Assessment of early outcomes. Indian J Gastroenterol 33, 136–140 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12664-013-0379-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12664-013-0379-1