Massive blood transfusion (MBT) is a common occurrence in liver transplant (LT) patients. Recipient-related risk factors include cirrhosis, history of multiple surgeries and suboptimal donors. Despite advances in surgical techniques, anesthetic management and graft preservation have decreased the need for transfusions, this complication has not been completely eliminated.

One thousand four hundred and sixty-nine LT were performed at our institution between May 2003 and December 2020, and data was available regarding transfusion for 1198 of them. We divided the patients into two groups, with regards to transfusion of 6 or more units of packed red blood cells in the first 24 h posttransplant, and we analyzed the differences between the groups.

Out of the 1198 patients, 607 (50.7%) met criteria for MBT. Survival was statistically lower at 1, 3, and 5 years when comparing the groups that had MBT to those that did not (92.6%, 85.2% and 79.7%, respectively, in the non MBT group, vs. 78.1%, 71.6% y 66.8%, respectively, in the MBT group). MBT was associated with a 1.5 mortality risk as opposed to non-MBT patients. Logistical regression analysis of our variables yielded the following results for a new model, including serum creatinine (OR 1.97), sodium (OR 1.73), hemoglobin (OR 1.99), platelets (OR 1.37), INR (OR 1.4), uDCD (OR 2.13) and split liver donation.

Massive blood transfusion impacts patient survival in a statistically significant way. The most significant risk factors are preoperative hemoglobin, INR and serum creatinine.

The utilization of split liver grafts can increase access to liver transplantation (LT) for adult patients, particularly when liver grafts are shared between 2 adult recipients. However, it is yet to be determined whether split liver transplantation (SLT) increases the risk of biliary complications (BCs) compared with whole liver transplantation (WLT) in adult recipients. This retrospective study enrolled 1441 adult patients who underwent deceased donor LT at a single-site between January 2004 and June 2018. Of those, 73 patients underwent SLTs. Graft type for SLT includes 27 right trisegment grafts, 16 left lobes, and 30 right lobes. A propensity score matching analysis selected 97 WLTs and 60 SLTs. Biliary leakage was more frequently seen in SLTs (13.3% vs. 0%; p <0.001), whereas the frequency of biliary anastomotic stricture was comparable between SLTs and WLTs (11.7% vs. 9.3%; p=0.63). Graft and patient survival rates of patients undergoing SLTs were comparable to those undergoing WLTs (p=0.42 and 0.57, respectively). In the analysis of the entire SLT cohort, BCs were seen in 15 patients (20.5%) including biliary leakage in 11 patients (15.1%) and biliary anastomotic stricture in 8 patients (11.0%) [both in 4 patients (5.5%)]. The survival rates of recipients who developed BCs were significantly inferior to those without BCs (p <0.01). By multivariate analysis, the split grafts without common bile duct increased the risk of BCs. In conclusion, SLT increases the risk of biliary leakage compared with WLT. Biliary leakage can still lead to fatal infection and thus should be managed appropriately in SLT.

Several surgical strategies, including split donor transplantation and living donor transplantation, have been used to increase the donor liver pool. This report focuses on the effects of whole, split, and LDLT on recipient outcomes.

We retrospectively analyzed the records of all patients with biliary atresia at Tianjin First Central Hospital between April 2013 and December 2019.

A total of 882 patients were included and divided into three groups by graft type, with 198 in the whole-liver-transplantation group, 78 in the split liver transplantation group, and 606 in the LDLT group. The median follow-up time was 39 months, patient survival rates of three groups were 94.4%, 88.5%, and 95.0%, respectively, and graft survival rates were 90.2%, 83.3%, and 94.7%, respectively. We divided the split liver transplantation group into two subgroups according to the donor's age, and patient survival rates exhibited a significant difference only in the group whose donor age was over 45 years. The postoperative complication rates were significantly higher with respect to hepatic artery thrombosis, portal stenosis, and AR; and lower in hepatic venous stenosis, PTLDs, CMV virus, and EBV infection in the WLT group. Our multivariate model showed that donor age ≥45 years, RBC transfusion, pneumonia, and HAT were the independent predictors of allograft loss.

The survival of split liver transplantation group was slightly lower. The types of complications are different from different graft types. Therefore, postoperative monitoring and treatment need to be adjusted according to the different graft types used.

Split liver transplantation addresses donor shortages by facilitating the transplant of two recipients using one donor liver. Some still consider these grafts inferior due to prolonged cold ischaemia time and at times difficult vascular reconstruction. Techniques such as in-situ splitting, machine perfusion and interposition grafts may address these challenges and thereby address these concerns. The aim of this review is to assess these technical advances in split liver transplantation, their utility and outcomes.

A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Keywords included 'split liver transplantation', 'arterial reconstruction', and 'machine perfusion'. Data found was synthesised into sections including: methods of splitting, full-left full-right splitting, donor cholangiography, machine perfusion and arterial reconstruction.

A total of 78 articles met inclusion criteria after screening of 151 eligible articles. These were subdivided into the following categories: in-situ (25), ex-vivo (25), full-left full-right splitting (15), donor cholangiography (2), machine perfusion (6), and arterial reconstruction (5). The in-situ splitting technique reduces the cold ischaemia time compared to the ex-vivo technique which may improve graft quality and liver splitting during normothermic machine perfusion is a novel technique with the potential to incorporate the best aspects of both techniques. Interposition grafts are often required during split liver transplantation but have an increased risk of hepatic artery thrombosis.

Advancements in technique have allowed many of the unique challenges of split liver transplantation to be overcome. Overall, this supports the use of split liver transplantation in broader and riskier settings and we advocate for liver transplant surgeons to not hesitate in using these grafts liberally and expanding their recipient selection criteria.

Benign biliary strictures after liver transplantation are common and can lead to graft dysfunction and decreased patient survival. Post-transplant strictures are classified as anastomotic or non-anastomotic which differ in response to therapy. Risk factors for biliary strictures following transplantation include impaired blood supply, surgical factors, and biliary anomalies. Patients can present with biliary obstruction but most will be asymptomatic, with only abnormal graft function. MRCP is the most sensitive noninvasive tool for diagnosing biliary complications. In most centres worldwide endoscopy is used first-line in the management of anastomotic strictures, although there is significant variation in endoscopic technique employed; including dilation, placing a single or multiple plastic stents, a fully covered metal stent and most recently using intra-ductal fully covered metal stents. With the introduction of fully covered metal stents the number of interventions patients require has reduced and overall the clinical success of the endoscopic approach has steadily improved. Percutaneous and surgical treatments are now reserved for patients in whom endoscopic management fails or who have had Roux-en-Y anastomoses. However even in these cases, combined procedures with interventional radiology, or implementation of enteroscopy and EUS-guided approaches now means very few patients ultimately require surgical revision.

SLT has the potential to counter the worldwide shortage of donor organs. Although the preferred recipients of SLT are usually pediatric patients, a more stringent ethical argument than the fundamental prioritization of children is to demonstrate that SLT of deceased donor organs could increase access to this potentially lifesaving resource for all patients, including children. Several empirical studies show that SLT also makes it possible to achieve similar outcomes to WLT in adults if several factors are observed. In general, it can be regarded as ethically permissible to insist on splitting a donor liver if, in an individual case, SLT is expected to have a similar outcome to that of WLT. The question is therefore no longer whether, but under what conditions SLT is able to achieve similar results to WLT. One of the main challenges of the current debate is the restricted comparability of the available data. We therefore have an ethical obligation to improve the available empirical data by implementing prospective clinical studies, SLT programs, and national registries. The introduction of 2 modes of allocation-one for patients willing to accept both SLT and WLT, and a second for patients only willing to accept WLT-would help to resolve the issue of patient autonomy in the case of mandatory splitting policy.

Split liver transplant is gaining increasing use in the current environment of growing organ shortage. It is associated with a higher risk of complications, owing to its complexity and technical challenges. Splenic artery steal syndrome, is a complication that can occur following liver transplant and cause inadequate hepatic arterial inflow, hepatic artery thrombosis and graft loss. We report a successful management of hepatic artery thrombosis and splenic artery steal syndrome after a split liver transplant by surgical thrombectomy followed by angiography and splenic artery embolization.

60-year old female, with liver cirrhosis, who underwent a deceased donor right lobe orthotopic liver transplant. The procedure was complicated by hepatic artery thrombosis, requiring re-exploration. However, despite anastomotic revision the patient had poor hepatic arterial inflow. Both angiography and ultrasonography demonstrated splenic artery steal syndrome. This was successfully managed by splenic artery embolization with improved hepatic artery flow on ultrasonography and angiography.

Splenic artery steal syndrome is a rare complication that can occur after a liver transplant. Experience with this phenomenon is limited in split liver transplantation.We demonstrated successful early management of splenic artery steal syndrome with coil embolization in a split liver transplant preventing further morbidity and graft loss.

Split-liver transplantation has been proposed as an alternative to whole liver (WL) transplantation to expand the donor pool, but studies comparing adult longterm outcomes between the 2 methods are conflicting and limited. This is the first Italian multicenter study that retrospectively analyzed 119 matched-pair recipients of whole and extended right grafts (ERGs) for longterm survival outcomes. In the overall population, WL recipients showed higher patient survival at 1 (93% versus 73%), 5 (87% versus 65%), and 10 years (83% versus 60%) after transplantation compared with split-liver recipients (P < 0.001); graft survivals of WL recipients were also superior at 1 (90% versus 76%), 5 (84% versus 57%), and 10 years (81% versus 52%) posttransplant (P < 0.001). However, among the 81 matched pairs that survived the first posttransplant year, 5- and 10-year patient survivals were 90% and 81% for split recipients and 99% and 96% for whole recipients, respectively (P = 0.34). The 5- and 10-year graft survivals were also comparable: 87% and 77% for split recipients, and 86% and 82% for whole recipients (P = 0.86). Cox regression analysis identified donor age >50, donor-to-recipient weight ratio < 1, retransplantation status, and United Network for Organ Sharing I-IIA status as risk factors for partial graft use. There were no significant differences in 5-year outcomes based on center volume. In conclusion, we demonstrate that adult liver transplantation with ERGs can achieve longterm success comparable with that of whole grafts in appropriate patients but should be selectively used in patients with risk factors. Liver Transplantation 23 1384-1395 2017 AASLD.

The aim of the study is the identification of independent risk factors for re-transplantation after primary liver transplantation beyond the occurrence of hepatic artery thrombosis.

Eight hundred thirty-four adult patients undergoing primary liver transplantation were analyzed. A propensity score was developed using multivariable binary logistic regression with hepatic artery thrombosis as the dependent variable. The logit link function of the propensity score was included into multivariable Cox regression analysis for graft survival to adjust the study population.

Graft loss was observed in 134 patients (16.1%). Independent significant risk factors for graft loss were recipient platelet count (p = 0.040; HR: 1.002; 95%-CI: 1.000-1.003), preoperative portal vein thrombosis (p = 0.032; HR: 1.797; 95%-CI: 1.054-2.925), donor age (p < 0.001; HR: 1.026; 95%-CI: 1.012-1.040), percentage of macrovesicular steatosis of the graft (p = 0.011; HR: 1.037; 95%-CI: 1.009-1.061), early complications leading to revision surgery (p < 0.001; HR: 2.734; 95%-CI: 1.897-3.956), duration of the transplant procedure (p < 0.001; HR: 1.005; 95%-CI: 1.003-1.007) as well as transplantation of a split liver graft (p = 0.003; HR: 2.637; 95%-CI: 1.420-4.728). The logit of the propensity score did not reach statistical significance in the final multivariable Cox regression model (p = 0.111) indicating good adjustment for the occurrence of hepatic artery thrombosis.

Liver transplant programs might benefit from regular donor organ biopsies to assess the amount of macrovesicular steatosis. An elevated recipient platelet count can promote reperfusion injury leading to graft loss. A liver graft from an elderly donor should not be split or be transplanted in a recipient with detected portal vein thrombosis.

Growing experience with the liver splitting technique and favorable results equivalent to those of whole liver transplant have led to wider application of split liver transplantation (SLT) for adult and pediatric recipients in the last decade. Conversely, SLT for two adult recipients remains a challenging surgical procedure and outcomes have yet to improve. Differences in organ shortages together with religious and ethical issues related to cadaveric organ donation have had an impact on the worldwide distribution of SLT. Despite technical refinements and a better understanding of the complex liver anatomy, SLT remains a technically and logistically demanding surgical procedure. This article reviews the surgical and clinical advances in this field of liver transplantation focusing on the role of SLT and the issues that may lead a further expansion of this complex surgical procedure.