摘要
Background: Small-for-size graft(SFSG) has emerged as one of the very contentions in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation(LDLT) as a certain graft size is related to recipients’ prognosis. Graftto-recipient weight ratio(GRWR)≥0.8% was considered as a threshold to conduct LDLT. However, this also has been challenged over decades as a result of technique refinements. For a better understanding of SFSG in practice, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare the perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes between patients adopting the grafts with a lower volume(GRWR < 0.8%, SFSG group) and sufficient volume(GRWR ≥ 0.8%, non-SFSG group) in adult-to-adult LDLT. Data sources: The studies comparing recipients adopting graft with a GRWR < 0.8% and ≥ 0.8% were searched by three authors independently in Pub Med, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases until September 2018 and data were analyzed by RevMan 5.3.5. Results: Sixteen studies with a total of 3272 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of small-for-size syndrome(SFSS), no significant difference was found in subjects enrolled after year 2010(before 2010, OR = 3.00, 95% CI: 1.69–5.35, P = 0.0002;after 2010, OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.79–1.90, P = 0.36;P for interaction: 0.02). There was no significant difference in operative duration, blood loss, cold ischemia time, biliary complications, acute rejection, postoperative bleeding, hospitalization time, perioperative mortality, and 1-, 3-and 5-year overall survival rates between two groups. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggested that adopting SFSG in adult LDLT has comparable outcomes to those with non-SFSG counterparts since 2010.
Background: Small-for-size graft(SFSG) has emerged as one of the very contentions in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation(LDLT) as a certain graft size is related to recipients’ prognosis. Graftto-recipient weight ratio(GRWR) ≥0.8% was considered as a threshold to conduct LDLT. However, this also has been challenged over decades as a result of technique refinements. For a better understanding of SFSG in practice, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare the perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes between patients adopting the grafts with a lower volume(GRWR < 0.8%, SFSG group) and sufficient volume(GRWR ≥ 0.8%, non-SFSG group) in adult-to-adult LDLT. Data sources: The studies comparing recipients adopting graft with a GRWR < 0.8% and ≥ 0.8% were searched by three authors independently in Pub Med, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases until September 2018 and data were analyzed by RevMan 5.3.5. Results: Sixteen studies with a total of 3272 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of small-for-size syndrome(SFSS), no significant difference was found in subjects enrolled after year 2010(before 2010, OR = 3.00, 95% CI: 1.69–5.35, P = 0.0002; after 2010, OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.79–1.90, P = 0.36; P for interaction: 0.02). There was no significant difference in operative duration, blood loss, cold ischemia time, biliary complications, acute rejection, postoperative bleeding, hospitalization time, perioperative mortality, and 1-, 3-and 5-year overall survival rates between two groups. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggested that adopting SFSG in adult LDLT has comparable outcomes to those with non-SFSG counterparts since 2010.
