title: Is there still a need for living-related liver transplantation in children?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess and compare the value of split-liver transplantation (SLT) and living-related liver transplantation (LRT).
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  The concept of SLT results from the development of reduced-size transplantation. A further development of SLT, the in situ split technique, is derived from LRT, which itself marks the optimized outcome in terms of postoperative graft function and survival. The combination of SLT and LRT has abolished deaths on the waiting list, thus raising the question whether living donor liver transplantation is still necessary.
  
  
  METHODS
  Outcomes and postoperative liver function of 43 primary LRT patients were compared with those of 49 primary SLT patients (14 ex situ, 35 in situ) with known graft weight performed between April 1996 and December 2000. Survival rates were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
  
  
  RESULTS
  After a median follow-up of 35 months, actual patient survival rates were 82% in the SLT group and 88% in the LRT group. Actual graft survival rates were 76% and 81%, respectively. The incidence of primary nonfunction was 12% in the SLT group and 2.3% in the LRT group. Liver function parameters (prothrombin time, factor V, bilirubin clearance) and surgical complication rates did not differ significantly. In the SLT group, mean cold ischemic time was longer than in the LRT group. Serum values of alanine aminotransferase during the first postoperative week were significantly higher in the SLT group. In the LRT group, there were more grafts with signs of fatty degeneration than in the SLT group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The short- and long-term outcomes after LRT and SLT did not differ significantly. To avoid the risk for the donor in LRT, SLT represents the first-line therapy in pediatric liver transplantation in countries where cadaveric organs are available. LRT provides a solution for urgent cases in which a cadaveric graft cannot be found in time or if the choice of the optimal time point for transplantation is vital.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, University Hospital Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany. broering@uke.uni-hamburg.de
authors.forename: D C
authors.initials: DC
authors.lastname: Broering
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Mueller
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Ganschow
authors.forename: J S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: E G
authors.initials: EG
authors.lastname: Achilles
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Schäfer
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Gundlach
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Fischer
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sterneck
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hillert
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Helmke
authors.forename: J R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Izbicki
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Burdelski
authors.forename: X
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Rogiers
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D005234:Fatty Liver / Q000209:etiology / Q000473:pathology; D005260:Female; D006085:Graft Survival; D006801:Humans; D007166:Immunosuppressive Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007223:Infant; D008099:Liver / Q000098:blood supply; D016031:Liver Transplantation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods / Q000401:mortality; D019520:Living Donors; D008297:Male; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D015427:Reperfusion Injury / Q000209:etiology / Q000473:pathology; D015996:Survival Rate
chemical_list: D007166:Immunosuppressive Agents