Deceased vs living donor grafts for pediatric simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: In conditions of limited experience of pediatric simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) using grafts from living and deceased donors, there is a certain need to validate the approach. PATIENTS: The retrospective study of 18 pediatric patients who received SLKT between 2008 and 2019. RESULTS: Grafts were obtained from both living and deceased donors. The patients' age ranged from 2 to 16 years (9 years ±4). The body weight of the children varied from 9.5 to 39 kg (22 kg ±9). The follow-up period lasted from 1 to 109 months (median 38 months ±35). The various graft combinations were used in both groups. There was no mortality during the follow-up. There was no significant difference in baseline parameters in recipients who received grafts from living and deceased donors except age (7.5 years ±2.2 vs 11.8 years ±4.1; P = .038). Rate of complications > grade II was higher among recipients of deceased donor SLKT (7.7% vs 60%; OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 1.04-58.48; P = .044). All the patients are alive with both grafts functioning. All the living donors returned to the normal life. CONCLUSION: SLKT is a safe and effective procedure for children with both simultaneous end-stage liver disease and end-stage renal disease. Both living donor partial liver and kidney transplantation and deceased donor liver-kidney transplantation can be considered as safe and feasible options.

Laparoscopic left lateral section procurement in living liver donors: A single center propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic living donor liver procurement for transplantation has increased in popularity over the past decade. The purpose of this study was to compare the laparoscopic and open approaches in living donor left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) and to assess the safety and feasibility of this laparoscopic approach. METHODS: A total of 103 living donor LLSs were performed at our center from May 2016 to December 2017. Of these, 35 were completely laparoscopic procedures, which represented the subject of this study. An additional 68 open living donor LLSs performed during the same period were studied as a comparison group. To overcome selection bias, LLS donors were balanced on a 1:1 ratio (laparoscopic [n = 35]: open [n = 35]) according to covariates with similar values. The PSM was based on the operation date, recipient age, diagnosis, recipient weight, and donor age. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the laparoscopic and open LLS groups (P < 0.001) in terms of blood loss (96.8 ± 16.5 vs 155.8 ± 17.8 mL) as well as the duration of hospital stay (4 ± 0.4 vs 6.9 ± 0.5 days). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic LLS is a feasible and efficacious in the setting of a developed program with advanced laparoscopic expertise.