Living donor liver transplant versus cadaveric liver transplant survival in relation to model for end-stage liver disease score.

BACKGROUND: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is universally used to prioritize patients on the liver transplant waiting list. It is potentially used to predict survival as well. There has been conflicting evidence on the use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients with high MELD scores. We reported retrospective data comparing survival between LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) In relation to MELD score in a single-center experience. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our records from 2001 to 2013 for LDLT and DDLT. Data reviewed include the numbers of patients for LDLT and DDLT, age, sex, MELD score, etiology of liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, re-transplantation, median follow-up, mortality (with 1 month, 1 year, or after 1 year), and cause of death. Only adults are included in this analysis. Patients were categorized into MELD scores above and below 25. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for survival, and the log-rank χ(2) test was used for comparison, with a value of P < .05 used for significance. RESULTS: The total number of transplanted patients at King Faisal Specialist Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was 491. There were 222 patients for LDLT and 269 patients for DDLT. The median age was 53 years (15-80 years), and 292 were male (59.5%). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival rates of LDLT and DDLT were 89%, 85%, and 84%, respectively, for MELD score below 25, and 80%,78%, and 77%, respectively, for MELD score greater than or equal to 25. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed no difference between the survival rates of the two groups (DDLT versus LDLDT), nor that high MELD score has a negative impact on survival. A larger cohort of patients may be needed to confirm these findings.

Donor organ shortage crisis: a case study review of a financial incentive-based system.

INTRODUCTION: Current organ supply system depends on altruistic noncoercive donation, which has failed to meet the demand of organ transplantation. Providing financial incentives to donors is one of several approaches to address organ shortage. However, its feasibility is debatable as it relates to medical, ethical, and economic dimensions. An incentive-based procurement system (IBPS) applied by the Mobile Donor Action Team (MDAT) was instituted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, resulting in a 3-fold increase in donation rate. The goal of this study was to provide a qualitative review of a 7-year experience with IBPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Documents were reviewed to create a chronological audit and shape interview questions. Sampling was purposeful and inclusive of MDAT members. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and findings were subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Documents reflected the evolution of MDAT. The essence of MDAT is field work and liberal use of financial incentives, which resulted in a 3-fold increase in the donation rate. MDAT members believed that IBPS is the main reason behind this increase. Moreover, IBPS is viewed as acceptable from a moral, ethical, and religious standpoint, with a high degree of professional satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Theoretical assumptions doubted the feasibility of IBPS. This real-life experience with IBPS proved the contrary. The findings may be applicable only to the setting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, however; further research is thus needed to explore its transferability to other settings. IBPS may be an alternative to altruistic noncoercive donation and should be piloted in different settings.

Regional variation in organ donation in Saudi Arabia.

INTRODUCTION: There is marked regional variation in organ donation among the different regions of Saudi Arabia. Our aim was to study the dominating factors for these variations to improve organ donation in low-donation areas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of the Saudi Center for Organ Transplantation data for cadaveric organ donation from 2006 to 2012, with the number of cases reported, documented, consented, and harvested in various regions (northern, southern, eastern, western, and central). The region, number, and size of contributing intensive care units (ICUs), overall donation rate, and transplanted rate (potential donor and those harvested, respectively) were also reviewed. RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2012, a total of 512 cases were procured and analyzed from Saudi Arabia. From the central region, 393 were acquired, representing 76.7% of the total consented cases. These 393 cases came from 30 of 97 contributing ICUs (31%). The eastern region was ranked second, followed by the western region. The conversion rate for all regions followed a similar trend. CONCLUSIONS: There is marked variation with regard to organ donation in different regions throughout Saudi Arabia, from 1.9% in the southern region to 76.7% in the central region. This finding is related to the presence of a Mobile Action Donor Team in the central region. The number of potential donors and the contributing ICUs were strong predictors of the number of actual donors. We suggest that having a mobile donor team in each region will increase the number of donors by at least 3 times within the next 3 to 5 years.

Donor outcome after living liver donation: a single-center experience.

OBJECTIVES: To objectively evaluate outcomes after living donor hepatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Between November 2002 and August 2006, a total of 44 procedures were performed (35 right, eight left, and one aborted after surgical incision). The Clavien classification was used to record surgical complications as follows: grade I, alterations from the ideal postoperative course not requiring specialized pharmacological or surgical treatment; grade II, complications requiring specialized pharmacological treatment, blood transfusion, or total parental nutrition; grade III-a, complications requiring invasive intervention without general anesthesia; Grade III-b, requires general anesthesia; Grade IV-a, single organ dysfunction; Grade IV-b, multiorgan dysfunction; grade V, death; The suffix "d" indicated disability. In this study, grades I and II complications were considered minor, while grades III and V and any lasting disability, serious complications. RESULTS: Male/female ratio was 34/10; median age was 25 years (range, 18 to 42); median hospital stay was 6 days (range, 4 to 14); and only two donors required intraoperative blood transfusion. After a median follow-up of 529 days (range, 8 to 1354), a total of 28 morbidities were encountered in 17 donors (38.6%), including nine donors (20.4%) who had serious complications. Among the 28 donor morbidities, 18 were grade I complications; three were grade III-a complications; five were grade III-b complications; and two were grade IV-a complications. No death was encountered in our experience. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, donor hepatectomy was not an entirely safe procedure; therefore, extreme care should always be given by the transplant teams to living donors to avoid any distressing morbidity or even, the less likely but more catastrophic, mortality.