Longterm clinical and radiological follow-up of living liver donors.

Although short-term risks of living donor hepatectomy have been well defined, little is known about the longterm impact. We aimed to perform a systematic follow-up to screen for unanticipated health consequences of liver donation. All donors who were more than 1 year from donation were invited for a systematic evaluation including physical and laboratory assessment, quality of life questionnaire, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). Those unable to return were offered the questionnaire and laboratory assessment at home. Out of our total of 97 donors, 45 returned for a full assessment and 23 completed labs and survey locally (total n = 68; 70%) after a median of 5.5 years (1.5-10.9 years) after donation. The only laboratory abnormality was a significant decrease in platelet count (median 198 ×10(9) /L versus 224 ×10(9) /L before donation; P < 0.001), whereas 93% of patients were still above normal limits. No late biliary strictures or other structural abnormalities were found on MRI/MRCP. Liver regeneration was complete. Spleen volume did significantly increase (median 278 cm(3) versus 230 cm(3) before donation; P < 0.001) without resulting in lowered platelets (P = 0.73). The most common complaints were persistent incisional numbness and changed bowel habits. Seven donors (11%) reported problems obtaining insurance. The vast majority (97%) would have donated again. In conclusion, longterm outcome following liver donation appears satisfactory. None of our donors have developed occult biliary strictures, failure of regeneration, abnormal liver function, or other important health consequences after a median of 5.5 years from surgery. These findings can be used when counseling potential donors in the future. Liver Transplantation 22 934-942 2016 AASLD.

An overview of psychosocial assessment procedures in reconstructive hand transplantation.

There have been more than 90 hand and upper extremity transplants performed worldwide. Functional and sensory outcomes have been reported in several studies, but little is known about the psychosocial outcomes. A comprehensive systematic literature review was performed, addressing the psychosocial impact of reconstructive hand transplantation. This review provides an overview of psychosocial evaluation protocols and identifies standards in this novel and exciting field. Essentials of the psychosocial assessment are discussed and a new protocol, the 'Chauvet Protocol', representing a standardized assessment protocol for future multicenter psychosocial trials is being introduced.

Psychological aspects of hand transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Psychosocial aspects are important indicators for reconstructive hand transplantation (RHT). They warrant further research attention given the influence of psychosocial factors on the success of RHT. This review will contrast RHT with solid organ transplantation, provide information to guide selection of RHT candidates and ethical implications, share information on psychological outcomes, and address the importance of a multicenter research approach. RECENT FINDINGS: Previously published RHT reports have tried to identify psychosocial factors that are essential to guide selection of RHT candidates and that predict psychosocial outcomes. These issues in RHT are receiving increased attention, but standardized psychosocial evaluation and follow-up protocols are still needed. Recent study highlights the potential for a multicenter research approach that uses standardized assessment strategies and also emphasizes the need for a shared assessment approach to understand psychosocial outcomes. SUMMARY: RHT combines the technical rigors of hand surgery and microsurgery with the complex multidisciplinary care that defines modern transplantation medicine. As recent work has provided a more complete picture of the complexities of the psychosocial factors in RHT, a psychosocial assessment protocol developed with input across the centers currently performing this procedure would capitalize on the collective diverse clinical experiences and standardize the assessment and follow-up protocol. With such standardized procedures in place, psychosocial risk factors for both poor psychosocial and medical/surgical outcomes can be identified which can inform the selection or preparation of future candidates.

The psychological assessment of candidates for reconstructive hand transplantation.

Standardized psychological assessment of candidates for reconstructive hand transplantation (RHT) is a new approach in transplantation medicine. Currently, international guidelines and standardized criteria for the evaluation are not established. Patients suffering from the loss of a hand or an upper extremity have to cope with multiple challenges. For a selected group of patients, RHT represents an option for restoring natural function and for regaining daily living independence. The identification of at-risk patients and those requiring ongoing counseling due to poor coping or limited psychological resources are the primary focus of the psychological assessment. We have developed the 'Innsbruck Psychological Screening Program for Reconstructive Transplantation (iRT-PSP)' which utilizes a semi-structured interview and standardized psychological screening procedures and continuous follow-up ratings. Between January 2011 and October 2011, four candidates were evaluated using the iRT-PSP. Psychological impairments including social withdrawal, embarrassment, reduced self-esteem, and a depressive coping style were identified and poor quality of life was reported. The motivation for transplantation was diverse, depending on many factors such as bi- or unilateral impairment, native or accidental loss of hand, and social integration.

Pretransplant psychiatric and substance use comorbidity in patients with cholangiocarcinoma who received a liver transplant.

BACKGROUND: Psychopathology has been commonly observed in liver transplant candidates, and up to 40% have comorbid psychiatric disorders. This illness burden may negatively impact quality of life and transplant outcome. Liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma remains uncommon due to the complex treatment protocol. We assessed for pretransplant psychopathology and substance use disorders in liver transplant recipients with cholangiocarcinoma to better characterize this patient group. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 143 liver transplant recipients who completed pretransplant psychological screening with the PAS, BDI-FS, BSI-18, and the SAAST between 2000 and 2004. The majority completed an evaluation by a transplant psychiatrist. Rates of pretransplant psychiatric and substance use symptoms and disorders were compared between 26 patients with cholangiocarcinoma and 117 other liver recipients using χ(2) or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Of the total cohort, 35% had a pretransplant psychiatric diagnosis, 35% had a substance use disorder, and 43% were current or former smokers. The cholangiocarcinoma cohort had significantly lower scores on the PAS, BDI-FS, and the BSI-18. On interview, the cholangiocarcinoma group was less likely to have an alcohol use disorder (P = 0.03) or any substance use disorder (P = 0.04), but the two groups did not differ significantly in the likelihood of having a psychiatric disorder or smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients with cholangiocarcinoma have lower rates of alcohol and drug use disorders than other liver transplant recipients. They do not differ in rates of psychiatric disorders or smoking. Psychosocial assessment and support are recommended throughout the transplant process.

Seligman's theory of attributional style: optimism, pessimism, and quality of life after heart transplant.

CONTEXT: Posttransplant quality of life can be significantly affected by personality characteristics identified before transplant. OBJECTIVE: Although overall quality of life in heart transplant patients improves after transplant, many studies reveal poorer mental health outcomes after transplant. We aimed to determine whether transplant recipients with an optimistic explanatory style had improved quality of life, fewer depressive symptoms, and increased survival. DESIGN: We reviewed 68 patients who had completed a Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory a mean of 2 years before transplant and examined associations between scores on the Optimism-Pessimism scale, survival rates, and results from the Health Status Questionnaire nearly 4 years after transplant. RESULTS: Optimism was significantly associated with higher quality of life even after age (at the time of transplant), sex, depression score before transplant, time from the personality inventory to transplant, and time from transplant to the Health Status Questionnaire were controlled for. Furthermore, a pessimistic explanatory style was significantly associated with self-reported depressive symptoms, even after depression before transplant was adjusted for. Neither optimism nor pessimism was associated with length of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Pretransplant patients with a pessimistic explanatory style reported depressive symptoms nearly 5 years later. Furthermore, over the same time span, patients with an optimistic explanatory style described a significantly higher quality of life than the pessimists described.

Emotional and Financial Experiences of Kidney Donors over the Past 50 Years: The RELIVE Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Most kidney donors view their experience positively, but some may experience psychosocial and financial burdens. We hypothesized that certain donor characteristics, poor outcome of the recipient, negative perceptions of care, and lack of support may be associated with poor psychosocial outcomes for donors. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: The Renal and Lung Living Donors Evaluation Study (RELIVE) examined long-term medical and psychosocial outcomes for kidney donors (at three U.S. transplant centers) who donated between 1963 and 2005. Standardized questionnaires evaluated donor perspectives, recovery time, social support, motivation, financial impact, insurability after donation, and current psychological status. Questionnaires were mailed to 6909 donors. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 2455 donors, who had donated 17 ± 10 years earlier (range, 5-48 years), a response rate of 36%. Most (95%) rated their overall donation experience as good to excellent. Rating the overall donor experience more negatively was associated with donor complications, psychological difficulties, recipient graft failure, and longer time since donation. Nine percent (n=231) reported one or more of the following poor psychosocial outcomes: fair or poor overall donor experience, financial burden, regret or discomfort with decision to donate, or psychological difficulties since donation. Recipient graft failure was the only predictor for reporting one or more of these poor psychosocial outcomes (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.33 to 2.34). Donors with lower educational attainment experienced greater financial burden. One of five employed donors took unpaid leave; 2% reported health and life insurability concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of donors viewed their overall donation experience positively, almost 1 in 10 donors reported at least one negative consequence related to donation. Recipient graft failure was associated with poor psychosocial outcome, defined as one or more of these negative consequences. Some donors were financially disadvantaged, and some experienced insurance difficulties. Interventions to avoid negative psychosocial and financial consequences are warranted.

Case series on defense mechanisms in patients for reconstructive hand transplantation: consideration on transplant defense concept.

BACKGROUND: The technical demands of reconstructive hand transplantation (RHT) and need for complex multidisciplinary care have led to intense research efforts to improve patient care and outcomes. However, RHT is an extraordinary life event which carries the potential for long-term consequences including psychological distress, which invokes coping and defense mechanisms. MATERIAL/METHODS: Little is known about the relationship between psychological defense mechanisms and health outcomes in RHT patients. In an effort to elucidate this relationship, we studied seven RHT patients who underwent standardized psychological assessment either pre- or post transplantation. RESULTS: No single defense concept was identified as common to all patients, which we suspect was due in part to the varied mechanisms of hand loss. All seven patients demonstrated diverse psychological reactions to RHT. The self-reported defense styles were associated with psychological adjustment. The patients who reported defenses that distorted reality described less adaptive functioning and psychological well-being. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings reveal the varied psychological mechanisms invoked in RHT patients. An assessment of defense mechanisms should be part of multicenter evaluation protocols that address unique psychosocial aspects of RHT in large samples, in order to better guide psychological management.

Satisfaction With Life Among Living Kidney Donors: A RELIVE Study of Long-Term Donor Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about living kidney donors' satisfaction with life (SWL) after donation. We compared donors' SWL to previously reported general population samples and investigated predictors of donors' SWL. METHODS: Three transplant centers mailed questionnaires to assess SWL, physical health, optimism, retrospective evaluation of the donation experience, and demographic characteristics to living kidney donors' homes between 2010 and 2012. Two thousand four hundred fifty-five donors who were between 5 and 48 years from the time of their donor surgery completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: Eighty-four percent of donors were satisfied with their lives (scores ≥ 20 on the Satisfaction With Life Scale). Donors were at least as satisfied with their lives as previously reported general population samples. After adjusting for physical health, optimism, and demographics, donors' SWL was significantly associated with donors' recalled experience of donation. Social support and positive effects of the donation on relationships predicted greater SWL. Financial difficulties associated with donation and longer recovery times predicted lower SWL. Recipient outcomes were not significantly related to donor SWL. DISCUSSION: Limitations include the lack of predonation SWL data, potential bias in postdonation SWL because of the situational context of the questionnaire, and a sample that is not representative of all U.S. living kidney donors. Nonetheless, strategies focused on improving the donation experience, particularly related to recovery time, financial issues, and social support, may result in greater SWL after donation.

Psychosocial factors in living organ donation: clinical and ethical challenges.

Living donor surgery has come to the forefront of public attention because increasing numbers of potential donors respond to the organ shortage. Because of several factors including decreased morbidity from donor surgery, online resources appealing for organs, and increased publicity about donation, new populations of unrelated donors are seeking evaluation for donor surgery. However, concern about potential coercion of vulnerable individuals, the potential for adverse psychosocial outcomes, and recent reports of donor deaths have reinvigorated discussion within the medical community about how best to assess donors. Research on the long-term quality of life outcomes for donors suggests that most donors are satisfied with their decision to donate. Small single-center studies on psychosocial outcomes have reported psychiatric sequelae after donor surgery. Little is known about the psychosocial outcomes for donors who are psychosocially excluded from donating. A multidisciplinary team approach, including social work and psychiatry evaluations, allows for the comprehensive assessment of important areas including motivation and expectations about surgery, current and past psychiatric conditions, history of substance or alcohol abuse, family support, understanding of the risks and alternatives of donor surgery for the donor and recipient, and motivation for donation including any evidence of coercion.