Search

Background: While most living kidney donors are satisfied with their decision and do not regret donating, few studies have been conducted on the determinants related to the effectiveness and regret of the decision. This study aims to explore the relationship between basic attributes, quality of life, positive affect, negative affect, effectiveness of decision-making, and regret in living kidney donors., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, living kidney donors were recruited from urology and kidney transplant outpatient services. The structured questionnaire used to collect the data included the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, Decision Conflict Scale, and Decision Regret Scale., Results: The findings indicate that living donors with better health status, 24-hour creatinine clearance, physical health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and positive affect experienced greater feelings of effective decision-making. Moreover, women and donors with better physical HRQOL, positive affect, and decision effectiveness were less regretful about the decision of kidney donation., Conclusion: Health status, physical HRQOL, and positive affect are related to decision validity and regret of living donors. Therefore, clinical care providers should regularly assess the mood and health of living kidney donors. Furthermore, activities promoting their health should be encouraged, especially for men., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to identify the factors influencing the positive and negative affects and the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of living kidney donors., Methods: With the use of a cross-sectional study design and a structured questionnaire, information on the basic characteristics, positive affect, negative affect, and HRQOL of 41 living kidney donors were compared., Results: The negative affect in living kidney donors was similar to that of the general population, but the positive affect was slightly lower. The physical HRQOL of living kidney donors was slightly higher than that of the general population, and the mental HRQOL was similar. Female donors showed a greater positive affect than male donors. The donors who were siblings of the recipients showed a more negative affect. Donors without chronic disease and with good perceived physical health showed improved positive affect, negative affect, and mental HRQOL. Furthermore, living kidney donors with better positive and negative affects showed improved physical and mental HRQOLs., Conclusions: Clinical health providers should evaluate and determine the positive affect, negative affect, and quality of life of living kidney donors, especially in men, siblings of the recipients, those with chronic disease, and those with poorer perceived physical health. Moreover, psychosocial interventions should be provided to improve these factors., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Living-donor kidney transplantation has a positive influence on recipients' life expectancy and improves quality of life for patients with end-stage renal disease compared with dialysis patients. Evaluation of the physical and mental quality of life for donors can promote positive perceptions about donation and help potential donors in their decision-making process. The aim of this study was to explore the predictive factors of quality of life for living kidney donors., Methods: A cross-sectional and descriptive design was used, and the study was conducted from January to July 2013. The donors were a convenience sample of 34 participants who had undergone kidney transplant surgery >1 year earlier., Results: The results showed that kidney donors had a low to moderate physical and mental quality of life. Multiple regression analysis revealed that financial concerns and anxiety explained 27.8% of the total variance of quality of life in the physical component. Anxiety and paid work explained 61.4% of the total variance of quality of life in the mental component., Conclusions: After renal transplantation, living kidney donors experienced low to moderate quality of life. Because donors are family members (siblings, sons or daughters, spouses, or parents), monthly family income is a significant issue that influences both the decision to donate and quality of life after transplantation. Our findings suggest that pre-transplantation assessment must include social workers as part of the health care team to evaluate the impact of a donor's financial status on post-transplantation quality of life., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Obesity, in the either kidney donor or the recipient, has been related to worse graft function. The aim of this study was to compare long-term graft outcomes of living-related kidney recipients regarding the donor-to-recipient body mass index (BMI) ratio., Methods: From November 2002 to November 2010, 62 consecutive living-related kidney transplantations were performed at our center. Donor and recipient BMIs were categorized by Taiwan's national standard using dividing values of 18.5, 24, and 27 kg/m(2) to divide subjects into donor-to-recipient BMI categories. These with the same BMI category as their donors were defined as the same-BMI group (group 0); recipients with a lower BMI category than their donors were defined as the large-to-small group (group 1); and those with a higher BMI category than their donors were defined as the small-to-large group (group 2). Baseline parameters and posttransplantation follow-up data were analyzed according to this grouping., Results: Of the 57 recipients followed regularly at our hospital (mean follow-up 48.9 months), 21 (36.8.1%) were in group 0; 26 (45.6%) in group 1, and 10 (17.6%) in group 2. The baseline parameters were similar among these groups. The overall graft survival rates were 81.0% in group 0, 76.9% in group 1, and 90.0% in group 2. The rejection-free graft survival rates were 81.0%, 65.4%, and 90.0%, respectively. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, group 1 showed worse rejection-free graft survival than group 0 or group 2 (log-rank P = .046)., Conclusions: Living-related recipients of kidneys from donors with a higher BMI showed lower long-term graft survival, which might suggest that petite recipients may need time to compensate adequate blood flow for the relative large graft, thus carrying a higher chance of rejection and worse graft outcomes., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Distinct from cadaveric donor renal transplantation, living donor renal transplantation has many benefits for the recipient, such as a shorter waiting time as well as longer patient and graft survivals. But, there is no potential physical benefit for the donors. Many studies have shown that laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) resulted in a lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay compared with an open donor nephrectomy. The present study was performed to analyze the quality of life (QoL) among patients who underwent LDN., Materials and Methods: From November 2005 to December 2008, 14 patients who underwent LDN were enrolled in this study. We assessed the QoL of these patients before versus 3 months after the operation using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), which were expressed as a Physical Component Summary and a Mental Component Summary. We analyzed the association between QoL and donor age, gender, relationship to the recipient, and renal function., Results: The Physical Component Summaries showed a significant decrease from the values before kidney donation (92.9+/-5.0) to 3 months thereafter (80.4+/-16.6; P=.004). In addition, the Mental Component Summaries were also significantly decreased from 84.2+/-10.2 to 76.8+/-19.2 (P=.012). However, the changes of QoL were not significantly associated with donor age, gender, relationship to the recipient, or renal function after kidney donation., Conclusion: This study revealed that kidney donation had negative impacts on donor QoL after LDN although renal function was well preserved. The QoL of a potential living donor must be evaluated carefully before transplantation., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become the method of choice for living-donor kidney transplantation. However, LDN may result in decreased renal function in the donor, and risk of end-stage renal failure has been reported., Objective: To evaluate changes in renal function after LDN., Patients and Methods: The study included 51 living donors of renal transplants between March 2002 and December 2008. Before kidney donation, we computed the initial function of the kidney preserved in the donor using 24-hour creatinine clearance (Ccr) and functional ratio as revealed at technetium 99m dimercaptosuccinic acid renal scanning. After kidney donation, serum creatinine concentration (sCr) and Ccr were calculated on postoperative day 2 and every 3 months thereafter., Results: After LDN, mean sCr increased immediately, from 0.90 to 1.31, as did Ccr of the kidney preserved in the donor, from 58.2 to 79.6, a 36.9% increase. A greater percent increase in function was observed in younger donors and those with lower initial Ccr of the preserved kidney. Although 9.8% of donors demonstrated slightly decreased renal function of the preserved kidney at last follow-up, renal function was adequately preserved in most donors., Conclusion: Younger donors and those with lower initial function of the preserved kidney before nephrectomy demonstrate a greater increase in function after nephrectomy. Age might be a risk factor for decreased renal function after LDN. Older potential living donors may need more careful evaluation before kidney donation., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this study is to present our institutional experience in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) as a treatment for end-stage liver disease in children with biliary atresia (BA). A retrospective review of transplant records was performed. One hundred BA patients (52 males and 48 females) underwent LDLT. The mean follow-up period was 85.5 months. The mean age was 2.4 years. The mean preoperative weight, height, and computed GFR were 12.2 kg, 82.5 cm, and 116.4 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Twenty-seven patients were below 1 year of age, and 49 patients were below 10 kg at the time of transplantation. Ninety-six had had previous Kasai operation prior to transplant. The mean recipient operative time was 628 min. The mean recipient intraoperative blood loss was 176 ml. Thirty-five did not require blood or blood component transfusion. The left lateral segment (64) was the most common type of graft used. There were 27 operative complications which included 3 reoperations for postoperative bleeding, 9 portal vein, 4 hepatic vein, 4 hepatic artery, and 7 biliary complications. There was one in-hospital mortality and one retransplantation. The overall rejection rate was 20%. The overall mortality rate was 3%. The 6-month, 1-year and 5-year actual recipient survival rates were 99%, 98% and 98%, respectively.

Objectives: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has become the method of choice for removal of living donor kidneys. However, the majority of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy cases have been limited to the left side owing to technical difficulties and renal vessel length. This study described the technique and compared donor outcomes and graft function of right and left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy., Materials and Methods: Among 25 patients, 6 consecutive donors underwent right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy from March 2002 to January 2005. They were compared to 19 patients with left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. We compared operative times, warm ischemia times, serial creatinines, creatinine clearances, complications, and graft function., Results: There was no significant difference in any metric. The operative times (303 min. vs 274 min., P > .05) and warm ischemia times (133 s vs 186 s, P > .05) were similar between right and left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy procedures. In left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, 3 patients had transient brachial plexus neuropathies. No major complication occurred among patients undergoing right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. This study demonstrated that both donor and recipient outcomes are similar for right and left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy., Conclusions: Consistent use of the left kidney has not affected clinical outcomes. With hand-assisted laparoscopy, the right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is safe, providing excellent graft function.

Objectives: As the number of cadaveric donor is far beyond the demand of the waiting list, living related kidney transplantation is important for the worldwide organ shortage. Besides, living related transplantation has advantages compared with cadaveric transplantation in terms of graft function and survival. However, the remaining kidney function of the living donor needs to be evaluated., Methods: We collected 28 paired living kidney donations from March 2003 to March 2005. All patients underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The preoperative kidney evaluation included renal echography, renal nuclear scan, computed tomography angiography (CTA), and creatinine clearance (CCr). The renal function of the donor kidney was expressed as (donor kidney/both kidneys)%. The percentage renal function from renal echography, renal nuclear scan, and CTA were correlated with CCr., Results: The mean percentage of donor kidney function according to renal echo, nuclear scan, and CTA were 49.77%, 51.83%, and 50.70%, respectively. The correlation coefficients for renal echography, nuclear scan, and CTA to CCr were -0.316, -0.201, and 0.123, respectively. The correlation coefficients for renal echography, nuclear scan, and CTA to postoperative serum creatinine of donor were 0.426, 0.036, and -0.119, respectively., Conclusion: From the viewpoint of donor postoperative residual renal function, preoperative renal sonography offered a better predictive value than nuclear scan or CTA.

Background: Although laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LLDN) was conceived to decrease morbidity and reduce donor disincentives, it requires considerable experience. We present a new combination of hand-assisted and standard laparoscopic approaches to live donor nephrectomy., Methods: Between March 2002 and February 2003, ten LLDNs were performed with the new procedures. Using the new methodology the surgeon can withdraw his hand and insert a trocar through the hand-assisted device whenever he desires. Although the hand-assisted procedure was performed in most patients, we attempted to dissect the renal hilum without hand assistance in the final patient, successfully procuring the kidney., Results: Mean operation time was 245 minutes and warm ischemic time was 179 seconds. No vascular, renal parenchymal, or ureteral injuries occurred. The patient with multiple left renal arteries had a longer warm ischemic time and delayed graft function. Mean predonation creatinine was 0.97 mg/dL, it increased to 1.44 and 1.15 mg/dL at 7 days and 3 months postdonation, respectively. One patient had chylous ascites and another had a transient left brachial plexus paralysis., Conclusions: Both pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted LLDN have advantages and disadvantages. In our modification, the free conversion from hand-assisted to a purely laparoscopic approach allows the surgeon to practice two procedures simultaneously. With this combination, 90% of the LLDN were accomplished, with pure laparoscopy in the last case.

Background: Modern imaging, such as CT and MRI, improves the preoperative assessment for variants of renal vasculature. We present a kidney donor with a duplex inferior vena cava. In conjunction with CT and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery, live donor nephrectomy was performed successfully., Methods: A 35-year-old woman wished to donate a kidney to her son. Preoperative CT showed normal functional kidneys without uretal duplication. A duplex inferior vena cava was noted below the level of the left renal vein. A hand-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic left nephrectomy was performed. Blood loss was minimal and the warm ischemia time was 3 minutes. Renal transplantation was performed with good initial perfusion and urine output., Results: The donor was discharged in good condition at 3 days postoperatively. Both donor and recipient are alive with good renal function and without late surgical complications at 9 months., Conclusions: Live donor nephrectomy is unique as it involves two different patients. Benefits from laparoscopic operation include less pain, shorter hospital stay, earlier resumption of normal food intake, and earlier return to full activity. Graft function was not deleteriously affected and the survival of graft and recipient was not affected. Vascular anomalies, although uncommon, had a significant influence on live renal transplantation. Our patient represents a case of a rare venous anomaly, which has an an incidence rate of 0.5% to 3%. Helical CT with reconstruction of vascular anatomy helped in evaluating donor vasculature. In conjunction with modern imaging techniques and laparoscopic operation, live donor nephrectomy can be performed safely, even in patients with vascular anomalies.

Introduction: Although the benefits of living donor organs for recipients are well documented, the risks and quality-of-life changes in living kidney donors are seldom reported., Methods: From July 1992 to June 2002, all living kidney donors underwent regular follow-up at our hospital. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), a standardized questionnaire to measure quality of life, was used in this study. Furthermore, donor renal function and associate complications were assessed., Results: Seventeen donors answered the questionnaire, including eight men and nine women of mean age of 41 years (range = 25 to 56). No perioperative mortality was noted. No proteinuria or hematuria was found during long-term follow-up. The mean serum creatinine level was 0.95 +/- 0.22 mg/dL before the operation. The postoperative mean serum creatinine levels at 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years were 1.22 +/- 0.34, 1.19 +/- 0.20, and 1.29 +/- 0.21 mg/dL, respectively. Two cases underwent scar revision and one complained long-term wound pain for more than 1 year. One donor became depressed because of graft failure in her son. The SF-36 scores were 84.4 +/- 4.4 (physical function), 84.0 +/- 4.7 (role-physical), 78.4 +/- 8.0 (body pain), 81.5 +/- 5.9 (general health), 83.2 +/- 3.7 (vitality), 83.9 +/- 5.9 (social functioning), 79.9 +/- 4.1 (role-emotional), and 78.6 +/- 2.3 (mental health), respectively., Conclusion: The quality-of-life changes and risks after donation are low; most donors are concerned about cosmetic problems and pain-related scar formation.

Background: Liver graft size, anatomy of the bile duct and the vascular inflow and outflow are essential for living related liver transplantation (LRLT). Preoperative delineation of those variations that would change the operative procedure to achieve a successful result especially in an emergency condition., Purpose: Our aim was to develop a rapid and noninvasive imaging diagnostic method for the detection of anatomical variants that is mandatory for a safe operation when selecting potential liver transplant living donors. We used a different magnetic resonance (MR) imaging technique, which enabled to us to exploit the anatomical landmark of the liver, signal enhancement of blood flow in the abdomen, and the intrahepatic biliary routes inside the liver. Then, with the help of Advantage Window workstation reconstruction, the reconstructed single vascular or biliary systems were displaced in a three-dimensional fashion and the whole examination finished within 30 min., Methods: Modification of the standard MR technique was performed on a superconductive 1.5T whole body image scanner, MR arteriogaphy, venography, and cholangiography with three-dimensional reconstruction in evaluating the anatomy of the hepatic arteries, hepatic veins, portal venous system, bile ducts, and liver size in potential liver transplant living donors. These anatomical structures were compared with traditional imaging methods., Results: In all 38 cases, as well as delineation of the portal vein detail to the segmental level was satisfactorily obtained in this MR study. The images were well displayed in a three-dimensional fashion, which had good correlation with images from traditional imaging modalities and operative findings. In 86.8% cases, the MR arteriography was well matched with the celiac angiography. Of those 17 operative cases, estimation of liver volume was well correlated with the liver graft within 3.9-12.5% variation. In the major hepatic vein, we obtained 100% accuracy and 88.2% in the minor branches. Of 12 donors received intraoperative cholangiography during liver donation, good correlation of biliary anatomy was achieved. One donor was excluded from graft donation due to the complicated arterial supply to the left liver. According to the anatomical variation, surgical procedures in graft harvesting and anastomosis were readjusted and no major complications were found in those donors and all recipients survived after liver transplantation., Conclusion: MR volumetry, venography, angiography, and cholangiography with three-dimensional reconstruction is sufficient for all major imaging evaluation. It may replace the traditional conventional catheter angiography, computed tomography, sonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography as a single investigation in the evaluation of the potential liver transplant donors. Angiography is only valuable in suboptimal cases and intraoperative cholangiography is only performed in biliary ductile variants.

Background: Biliary tract reconstruction has long been considered the Achilles' heel of liver transplantation as biliary complications can increase morbidity and mortality especially in partial liver graft transplantation., Methods: Thirty-four living related liver transplants were performed at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Kaohsiung for 33 children and 1 adolescent during a 5.5-year period. All potential donors underwent a detailed preoperative imaging study of the vascular and biliary anatomy, including three-dimensional helical computed tomographic cholangiography (n = 20), magnetic resonance cholangiography (n = 14), and intra-operative cholangiography (n = 31) before graft retrieval. All hepatic artery anastomoses were performed in the standard microsurgery fashion and their patency was confirmed intra-operatively using Doppler ultrasound., Results: The biliary complication rate was 8.8% (3/34), including multiple intrahepatic biliary stenosis of unknown origin (n = 1), bile leakage from the Roux-en-Y loop (n = 1), and a missed biliary radicle (n = 1) which were treated via interventional radiological and surgical procedures. The overall graft and patient survival rates were 100%., Conclusion: The biliary complication rate in this series was low compared to those of other experienced centers. Complete study of the variations of intrahepatic duct ramification pre-and-intra-operatively provided adequate information on the appropriate transection plane. Furthermore, intra-operative Doppler ultrasound verification of vessel patency helps prevent vascular complications, which has been identified as a cause of biliary complications.

Background: Hepatic venous reconstruction is critical in living donor liver transplantation because outflow obstruction may lead to graft dysfunction or loss. We describe our experience and analyze outcomes with a technique of creating a single outflow tract using venoplasties of the graft and recipient hepatic veins., Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was done on 38 consecutive living donor liver transplants performed from June 1994 to March 2000. The grafts included 36 left-side grafts and 2 right-side grafts. Nine grafts had multiple hepatic veins and required a venoplasty of two or three hepatic veins to create a single outflow orifice. Triple recipient hepatic venoplasty was performed in 32 patients, double venoplasty in 5 and none in 1., Results: There were four cases of outflow obstruction, three occurring in patients with a double recipient venoplasty. Two of the problems were remedied intraoperatively by adjusting the position of the graft although two were structural in nature and required the insertion of expandable metallic vascular stents. All donors and recipients with their original grafts are alive at a mean follow-up period of 27 months., Conclusion: A triple recipient venoplasty with a matching venoplasty of multiple graft hepatic veins to create a single wide outflow orifice is recommended in living donor liver transplantation using left side grafts.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of the medial segment of the graft after living related liver transplantation (LRLT). Of the 12 pediatric recipients who underwent LRLT, 2 received whole left liver graft, 1 left lateral segment graft, and 9 extended left lateral segment grafts. The hepatic veins of the donor were reviewed and the volume of the medial segment and left lateral liver was measured before and 6 months after liver transplantation. The flow velocity and direction of the portal vein in the medial segment graft was also evaluated by Doppler ultrasound. The grafted livers of all recipients showed a substantial increase in volume of 9-120% 6 months after LRLT. For the left lateral segment, an increase in volume was found in all cases ranging from 21 to 245%. For the medial segment, volume increases of 5-48% were found in seven cases with normal hepatopetal flow detected inside the segment 4 intrahepatic portal vein. In four cases, the partial medial segment graft of the extended left lateral liver graft decreased in volume from 33 to 69%. Among these four cases, slow flow (n = 2) and hepatofugal flow (n = 1) were also detected in the intrahepatic portal vein of the medial segment. Mapping of the tributary of the hepatic veins of the graft revealed inadequate venous drainage of the partial segment 4 graft, which may be considered as the cause of the atrophic change of the partial segment 4 graft. In conclusion, different regenerative rates between the left lateral segment and the medial segment were noted, with a greater rate in the left lateral segment. The venous drainage of the medial segment is of primary concern in the determination of the outcome of the regeneration. Atrophic change occurs when inadequate hepatic venous drainage is encountered. Therefore, if an extended left lateral liver graft is required, the corresponding draining veins of the partial medial segment must be preserved. Otherwise, whole left liver or left lateral segment graft would be a better choice.

Living related liver transplantation (LRLT) has been developed in response to the paediatric organ donor shortage. According to the International Living Donor Registry, 521 transplants had been performed in 515 patients between December 8 1988 and January 19 1996 in 30 centres worldwide. The overall actuarial patient and graft survival rates were 82.7 and 80%, respectively. Between June 17 1994 and November 30 1996, the authors performed 11 LRLT at the Chung Gung Memorial Hospital. The living donors consisted of 10 mothers and one father. The mean graft weight was 303 g and the mean graft recipient weight ratio was 2.2%. Donor hepatectomy was performed without vascular inflow occlusion. The intra-operative blood loss ranged from 30 mL to 120 mL with an average of 61 mL, and blood transfusion was not required in all donors both intra-operatively and during the postoperative period. Underlying diseases of the recipients were biliary atresia (n = 10) and glycogen storage disease (n = 1). The mean graft cold ischaemia time was 106 min, the mean second warm ischaemia time was 51 min and the mean interval between portal and arterial reperfusion was 81 min. The initial LRLT results were promising with all donors having been discharged without complication. The recipients experienced a few complications, all of which were manageable with early intervention. All 11 recipients are alive and well. These are encouraging results and the authors hope to expand the use of live donors for liver transplantation to cope with demand.