ObjectiveTo evaluate donor safety in living donor liver transplantation. MethodsThe clinical data of 356 donors underwent living liver donation in our center from January 2001 to September 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were divided into pre-2008 group(before January 2008) and post-2008 group(after January 2008). The donor safety was evaluated with regard to three aspects, i.e. complications, liver function, and quality of life. Results①There was no donor death in our center.②The overall complications rate was 23.3%(83/356). The proportion of ClavienⅠ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, andⅣcomplications was 50.6%(42/83), 26.5%(22/83), 21.7%(18/83), and 1.2%(1/83), respectively. In all the donors, the incidence of ClavienⅠ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, andⅣcomplications was 11.8%(42/356), 6.2%(22/356), 5.1%(18/356), and 0.3%(1/356), respectively. The overall complications rate in the post-2008 group was significantly lower than that in the pre-2008 group〔18.1%(41/227) versus 32.6%(42/129), P < 0.01〕. The most common complication was the biliary complication with an incidence of 8.4%(30/356).③The postoperative liver dysfunction was transient and generally retur-ned to normal level within a week.④The donor's quality of life was generally satisfied as assessed by the SF-36 tool, and 94.8%(239/252) of them would donate again if necessary. ConclusionEver improving surgical and anesthetic techniques, together with strict donor selection and specialized perioperative management, could guarantee a low donor morbidity and a satisfactory long-term prognosis.
Liver transplantation；Imaging evaluation；Donor；Recipient
目的总结心脏移植和双肺移植供体心肺同时摘取的经验。 方法解放军第一八一医院心脏中心2012年完成3例同一供体心肺同时摘取，分别完成心脏移植和双肺移植各3例。3例供体为脑死亡，阻断供体升主动脉和主肺动脉后，同时灌注保护液，心脏保护应用组氨酸-色氨酸-酮戊二酸心脏停搏液（HTK液），肺保护应用低钾右旋糖酐液（LPD液）；供体心肺热缺血时间为5 min，供心冷缺血时间分别为252 min、323 min和375 min，供体肺冷缺血时间分别为610 min、679 min和738 min；3例心脏移植均采用双腔静脉吻合法，3例肺移植均采用序贯式双肺移植。 结果3例心脏移植均存活；肺移植2例存活，1例死亡。存活患者出院后生活质量良好，随访8～13个月未出现感染、急性排斥反应等并发症。 结论供体心肺同时摘取，同时灌注后分别修剪并再次灌注，分别保存运输，心脏移植和双肺移植可取得满意效果。
Living donor liver transplantation is one of the main solutions to the organ supply-demand discrepancy at present. However, there was a risk of the recipient developing small-for-size syndrome due to insufficient graft volume, while an excessively large graft volume for donation might lead to postoperative liver failure for the donor. In this context, the dual-graft liver transplantation had emerged, which could minimize the volume of liver resection from the each donor to ensure the donor’s safety and provide the adequate volume of liver for the recipient. Yet, this procedure is less commonly performed in our country. In order to promote the steady implementation of dual-graft liver transplantation in China and serve as an important supplement to the donor pool, the West China Hospital of Sichuan University organized relevant experts and draw on the mature experiences of advanced countries in the field of transplantation jointly formulated the “Expert consensus on dual-graft liver transplantation”. The consensus had been developed around aspects such as donor evaluation and selection, surgical methods, and postoperative complications.
【Abstract】ObjectiveThe growing gap between the number of patients waiting for transplantation and available organs has continued to be the number one issue facing the transplant community. The major limitation of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is the adequacy of the graft size. But donor safety is the major concern in LDLT. Methods Two patients with end-stage liver disease were successfully performed adult-to-adult LDLT using dual grafts in our division. One patient’s donors are left lobe and left lobe from his two old sisters , respectively. The other graft are right lobe from his 56 years-old mother and left lobe splitting from a cadaveric organ donor (the other part of split-liver transplants from the the cadaveric organ donor offer to another adult donor ). Results Both recipients and three donors display good graft function and normal triangularshape regeneration of their liver grafts after liver transplantation. There was neither a mortality nor a serious complications in the donors. Conclusion The critical issue of LDLT is donor morbidity. Dual grafts from two living donors can help to alleviate the problem of small-for-size grafts and yet secure the safety of the donor. But the complicated surgical technique give a great challenge for liver transplant surgeons.
Non-heart-beating donor is an important source for lung transplantation, and has been successfully used in clinical practice for many years with satisfactory outcomes. But donor shortage, imperfect lung preservation techniques and ethical controversies still limit the development of non-heart-beating donor. In recent years, with continuous scientific progress, great progress has been made in each aspect of non-heart-beating donor. Here we review the clinical categories, ischemia time, death determination, ethical progress, and lung preservation techniques of non-heart-beating donor.
Objective To discuss venous drainage types of median hepatic lobe and their guiding significances on the selection of grafts. Methods Between April 2005 and March 2009, 109 potential living donors underwent 3-dimensional reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) and the volume of graft was determined in the center of organ transplantation of Ruijin Hospital. The venous drainage types of median hepatic lobe of each donor were analyzed by the computer-based liver operation-planning system in detail to assign middle hepatic vein (MHV) types according to Marcos classification and venous types of Ⅳb segment according to Nakamura classification. Results The branching pattern of MHV was divided into 3 types: Type Ⅰ and Ⅱwere relatively more accounting for 44.0% （48/109）, 37.6% （41/109）, and type Ⅲ was fewest 〔18.3% （20/109）〕. There were no significant differences in volume of whole liver, volume of left liver or left liver/total liver volume ratio among various types of MHV of the donor (Pgt;0.05). Ⅳb vein was also divided into 3 types: The most common was type Ⅰ, accounting for 72.4% (79/109); Type Ⅱ 〔12.8% （14/109）〕, type Ⅲ 〔14.7% （16/109）〕 were relatively fewer. At last, 37 donors provided right liver, for Marcos Ⅰ, Ⅱ, and Ⅲ type of donors, donors remained with MHV was 12/17, 8/11, and 5/9; for Nakamura Ⅰ, Ⅱ, and Ⅲ type of donors, those number were 16/26, 4/6, and 5/5. Conclusion In adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation, there may be great significances in accordance with Marcos and Nakamura typing results to harvest right lobe liver graft with or without MHV.
ObjectiveTo explore modified methods and outcomes of collection of donor blood from donation after citizen death (DCD). MethodThe clinicopathologic data of 26 DCD donors underwent phase Ⅰ clinical trials and 6 patients who received donor blood by modified collection technique from May 2020 to November 2021 in the West China Hospital of Sichuan University were collected retrospectively. ResultsCompared with the data of 26 DCD donors at phase Ⅰ clinical trials, after the modified collection technique, the blood collection volume, the concentrated red blood cells following filtration, centrifugation, and the amount of concentrated red blood cell/kg body mass were more (P<0.05). In addition, compared with the components of stored red blood cell suspension, the pH value, sodium and chloride ions concentrations of the red blood cell suspension obtained after modified collection technique were higher (P<0.05), the potassium ion concentration was <1 mmol/L, and the lactic acid concentration of none of blood was >15 mmol/L. ConclusionThe adoption of the modified collection technique increases the amount of donor red blood collected, and its biochemical and electrolyte indicators are more in line with physiological requirements than those of stored blood.