Purpose: Weight reduction (WR) can reduce liver volume, affecting the graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR). This study aimed to evaluate the decrease in liver volume after WR and analyze risk factors affecting liver volume reduction in potential liver donors with steatosis. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data of 147 potential liver donors with steatosis who participated in a WR program prior to liver transplantation between January 2016 and December 2021. Total liver volume (TLV) was measured using CT and MRI. Risk factors for large liver volume reduction (≥10%) were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: Ninety-seven donors (66.0%) underwent donor hepatectomy after WR. Liver volumes showed a statistically significant decrease (from 1,399.6 ± 315.4 mL to 1,283.6 ± 271.2 mL, P < 0.05). Thirty-eight donors (42.7%) showed large liver volume reduction. There was a more significant reduction in weight, AST, and ALT in the large liver volume reduction group than in the small liver volume reduction group (all P < 0.05). WR percentage and ALT abnormalities were independent risk factors for large liver volume reduction (odds ratio, 1.184 [95% confidence interval, 1.054–1.329] and odds ratio, 5.502 [95% confidence interval, 1.660–18.229], respectively; all P < 0.05). Conclusion Potential liver donors with 7% or more WR or ALT abnormality require liver volume/GRWR remeasurement after WR to ensure adequate graft size and prevent small-for-size syndrome.

Purpose: An increasing number of older patients now undergo liver transplantation (LT). Although the overall outcomes in older patients are not different from those of younger patients, there is no tool to predict LT prognosis in older patients.We hypothesized that a modified Charlson comorbidity index (mCCI) and 5-factor modified frailty index (mFI-5) can predict outcomes in older patients after LT. Methods: This retrospective study included 155 patients (aged >65 years) who underwent LT at Seoul National University Hospital. The recipients were subcategorized into 2 groups based on the mCCI score and mFI-5: the low (0–1) and high (2–5) mCCI groups, and low (≤0.4) and high (>0.4) mFI-5 groups. The independent effect of each variable on post-LT survival was determined using the mCCI subgroup, age at transplantation, sex, Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and mFI-5 subgroup. Results: The high-mCCI group (41 patients) showed significantly lower 1- and 3-month and 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival than the low-mCCI group. Using the Cox regression model, the mCCI, sex, and MELD score remained significant. The mFI-5 was not a significant factor to predict patients’ survival. Conclusion The mCCI and MELD scores could be used to predict post-LT survival in older patients.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Fatigue is common in chronic hepatitis and end-stage liver disease. However, little is known about fatigue after liver transplantation (LT). We therefore evaluated the prevalence, severity, and related factors of fatigue after LT. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed adult recipients who responded to our survey at outpatient clinics between April and May 2013. Fatigue and its severity were assessed using a questionnaire with the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). We defined fatigue as FSS of 4.0 or more and severe fatigue as FSS of 5.1 or more. The related factors including hepatocellular carcinoma and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 54.9 (19-76) years and two-thirds were men (67.7%). Living donor LT was 77.4%. Hepatitis B related liver disease was the main underlying disease (77.4%), with hepatocellular carcinoma accompanied in 33.3%. The mean follow-up period was 66.8+/-43.2 (2-171) months. The mean FFS was 2.83+/-1.48 (1.0-6.7) overall and 5.10+/-0.82 (4.0-6.7) in the fatigue group. Of the 93 adult patients, fatigue was presented in 20 patients (21.5%). Among these, 9 patients (45.0%) showed severe fatigue. Even though post-LT complications tended to be greater in the fatigue group (50.0% vs. 30.1% in the non-fatigue group, p=0.098), there were no significant related factors of fatigue after LT, including hepatocellular carcinoma and major complication. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue is present in a considerable portion of recipients after LT, and almost half of them have severe fatigue. Further efforts are needed to decrease fatigue in LT recipients.
Adult ; Ambulatory Care Facilities ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular ; Fatigue* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hepatitis B ; Hepatitis, Chronic ; Humans ; Liver Diseases ; Liver Transplantation* ; Liver* ; Living Donors ; Male ; Prevalence ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors