Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 4, 2025
12:49
Porcine Liver Transplantation Without Veno-Venous Bypass As an Extended Criteria Donor Model
Published on: August 17, 2022
2.6K
Small-for-Size versus Standard-Size Graft in Living Donor Liver Transplantation
Abdul Wahab Dogar1, Shams Uddin1, Azhar Hussain1
1Department of Liver Transplant Unit, Pir Abdul Qadir Shah Jeelani Institute of Medical Sciences, Gambat, Sindh, Pakistan.
Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP
|February 11, 2022
Summary
Small-for-size grafts in living donor liver transplantation showed comparable postoperative complications and graft survival rates to standard-size grafts. This indicates that small-for-size grafts are a viable option, offering similar outcomes to standard grafts.
Area of Science:
- Transplantation Surgery
- Hepatology
- Graft Optimization
Background:
- Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a critical procedure for end-stage liver disease.
- Graft size mismatch, specifically small-for-size grafts (SFSG), can impact transplant outcomes.
- Understanding the comparative efficacy of SFSG versus standard-size grafts (SSG) is crucial for surgical decision-making.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the outcomes of small-for-size grafts versus standard-size grafts in LDLT.
- To evaluate differences in postoperative complications, early graft dysfunction, and 1-year survival rates.
- To assess the safety and efficacy of SFSG in a real-world clinical setting.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 147 LDLT recipients.
- Participants were categorized into two groups: small-for-size graft (GRWR <0.8%) and standard-size graft (GRWR >0.8%).
- Demographics, graft characteristics, operative parameters, postoperative complications, and graft survival were analyzed and compared between groups.
Main Results:
- Out of 147 recipients, 21 had SFSG and 126 had SSG.
- Statistically significant differences were observed in body mass index, hepatic venous reconstruction, and liver attenuation index between groups.
- Postoperative complications and graft survival rates were comparable, with 1-year survival at 90.5% for SFSG and 96.0% for SSG (p=0.272).
Conclusions:
- Postoperative complications are comparable between small-for-size grafts and standard-size grafts in LDLT.
- Graft survival in small-for-size grafts is as effective as in standard-size grafts.
- SFSG represents a safe and effective option in living donor liver transplantation, yielding similar outcomes to SSG.
