Estimating liver weight of adults by body weight and gender.

AIM: To estimate the standard liver weight for assessing adequacies of graft size in live donor liver transplantation and remnant liver in major hepatectomy for cancer. METHODS: In this study, anthropometric data of body weight and body height were tested for a correlation with liver weight in 159 live liver donors who underwent donor right hepatectomy including the middle hepatic vein. Liver weights were calculated from the right lobe graft weight obtained at the back table, divided by the proportion of the right lobe on the computed tomography. RESULTS: The subjects, all Chinese, had a mean age of 35.8+/-10.5 years, and a female to male ratio of 118:41. The mean volume of the right lobe was 710.14+/-131.46 mL and occupied 64.55%+/-4.47% of the whole liver on computed tomography. Right lobe weighed 598.90+/-117.39 g and the estimated liver weight was 927.54+/-168.78 g. When body weight and body height were subjected to multiple stepwise linear regression analysis, body height was found to be insignificant. Females of the same body weight had a slightly lower liver weight. A formula based on body weight and gender was derived: Estimated standard liver weight (g) = 218 + BW (kg) x 12.3 + gender x 51 (R2 = 0.48) (female = 0, male = 1). Based on the anthropometric data of these 159 subjects, liver weights were calculated using previously published formulae derived from studies on Caucasian, Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. All formulae overestimated liver weights compared to this formula. The Japanese formula overestimated the estimated standard liver weight (ESLW) for adults less than 60 kg. CONCLUSION: A formula applicable to Chinese males and females is available. A formula for individual races appears necessary.

Working up donors for high-urgency and elective adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation.

Donor workup for adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation is done to ensure that the donor remains physically and psychologically healthy after saving or improving the life of the recipient. Even though two-thirds of the liver transplants in our center were from live donors, this life-saving procedure remains a mere treatment option, given the magnitude of the donor operation with the associated donor risks. Live donor liver transplantation was also adopted for high-urgency situations provided that the donor was suitable and the recipient considered salvageable. Donor workup in this setting had not been reported in the literature. In this cohort of 399 potential donors, 128 (32.1%) ultimately underwent donor surgery. Donors in the high-urgency situation had a lower operation rate of 28.4% (64/225) compared with that of 36.8% (64/174) of donors in the elective situation (P = 0.049). Dropouts from step 1 mainly because of ABO incompatibility, positive hepatitis serology, comorbidities, and voluntary donor withdrawal were 52.6% (210/399). Only 11.6% (22/189) of the potential donors who proceeded to subsequent steps of the workup dropped out (2 were psychologically unsuitable, 10 were anatomically prohibitive). The transplantation rate of potential recipients with 1 or more potential donors was also high. The rates were similar for the high-urgency (55%, 64/116) and the elective (51%, 64/125) situations. In a region with scarcity of deceased donor liver grafts, careful and expeditious initial donor workup minimizes dropouts from subsequent steps and allows timely transplantation in high-urgency situations.

Donor quality of life before and after adult-to-adult right liver live donor liver transplantation.

Donor right hepatectomy for adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is a major surgical operation for the benefit of the recipient. Justification of procedure mandates knowledge of the possible physical and psychological negative effects on the donor. We prospectively and longitudinally quantified donor quality of life using generic and condition-specific questionnaires up to 1 year. The generic questionnaires were the Karnofsky Performance Status scale and the Chinese (Hong Kong) version of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Survey, which measures 8 health concepts: 4 physical components and 4 mental components. Within 1 year, 30 consecutive donors were included. These 11 male and 19 female donors (36.7% and 63.3%, respectively) had a median age of 35 years (range, 21-56 years). There was no donor mortality or major complications. Donor quality-of-life worsening was most significant in the first 3 postoperative months, particularly among the physical components. The physical and mental components returned to the previous levels in 6 to 12 months' time, though the Karnofsky performance scores were slightly lower at 1 year (P = 0.011). Twenty-six (86.7%) donors declared that they would donate again if there were such a need and it were technically possible. It was noticed that older donors were more likely to express unwillingness to donate again. In conclusion, the temporary worsening of donor quality of life substantiates ALDLT as an acceptable treatment modality.