Increasing living donor liver transplantation: liver exchange and other options

 Here's an early online paper from the journal Liver Transplantation.

Can living donor liver transplant in the United States reach its potential?  by Alyson Kaplan, Russell Rosenblatt, Benjamin Samstein, Robert S. Brown Jr., 

First published: 26 June 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.26220   

Abstract: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a vital tool to address the growing organ shortage in the United States caused by increasing numbers of patients diagnosed with end-stage liver disease. LDLT still only makes up a very small proportion of all liver transplants performed each year, but there are many innovations taking place in the field that may increase its acceptance amongst both transplant programs and patients. These innovations include ways to improve access to LDLT, such as through non-directed donation, paired exchange, transplant chains, transplant of ABO-incompatible donors, and transplant in high MELD patients. Surgical innovations, such as laparoscopic donor hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy and portal flow modulation, are also increasingly being implemented. Policy changes, including decreasing the financial burden associated with LDLT, may make it a more feasible option for a wider range of patients. Lastly, center-level behavior, such as ensuring surgical expertise and providing culturally competent education, will help towards LDLT expansion. While it is challenging to know which of these innovations will take hold, we are already seeing LDLT numbers improve within the last two years.

A non-simultaneous liver exchange chain at UCSF, and a brief history of liver exchange

 Living donor liver transplants are relatively uncommon in North America compared to Asia.  Liver exchange might help change that. Here are some reports of recent and not so recent liver exchanges, including a non-simultaneous exchange chain  at UCSF, and a simultaneous chain in Canada.  Expect more in the near future.

 (Non-simultaneous chains have become the backbone of kidney exchange in the U.S., so we may start to see longer chains of liver exchange as well.)

Here's the most recent report of a short non-directed donor chain:

Expanding living donor liver transplantation: Report of first US living donor liver transplant chain  by Hillary J. Braun  Ana M. Torres  Finesse Louie  Sandra D. Weinberg  Sang‐Mo Kang  Nancy L. Ascher  John P. Roberts, American Journal of Transplantation, First published: 10 November 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.16396

Abstract: "Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) enjoys widespread use in Asia, but remains limited to a handful of centers in North America and comprises only 5% of liver transplants performed in the United States. In contrast, living donor kidney transplantation is used frequently in the United States, and has evolved to commonly include paired exchanges, particularly for ABO‐incompatible pairs. Liver paired exchange (LPE) has been utilized in Asia, and was recently reported in Canada; here we report the first LPE performed in the United States, and the first LPE to be performed on consecutive days. The LPE performed at our institution was initiated by a nondirected donor who enabled the exchange for an ABO‐incompatible pair, and the final recipient was selected from our deceased donor waitlist. The exchange was performed over the course of 2 consecutive days, and relied on the use and compliance of a bridge donor. Here, we show that LPE is feasible at centers with significant LDLT experience and affords an opportunity to expand LDLT in cases of ABO incompatibility or when nondirected donors arise. To our knowledge, this represents the first exchange of its kind in the United States."

The paper says this about the timing of the surgeries:

"Other centers reporting LPE have performed the donor and recipient operations in four operating rooms simultaneously4, 5 which can be logistically challenging, but addresses concerns regarding simultaneity and equalizing risk. In our case, we performed the operations on sequential days. In doing so, we accepted the risk that, given a good outcome in Recipient 1 on the first day, Donor 2 (the “bridge” donor) might opt out of living donation at the last moment. Reappropriating terminology from the kidney paired exchange (KPE) literature, a bridge donor is defined as someone who donates more than 1 day after their intended recipient received a transplant.12 A recent paper discussing the feasibility of LPE in the United States emphasized that, in the early days of KPE, there was concern that the bridge donor might back out at the last minute and break the chain.13 As a result, kidney donor operations were initially attempted simultaneously. However, a 2018 review of 344 KPE chains between 2008 and 2016 revealed that only 5.6% of bridge donors broke the chain and the majority of these donors developed a medical issue during their time as a bridge donor that prohibited them from completing donation.12 Ultimately, because this occurrence was so infrequent, the authors concluded that simultaneous donor operating rooms for chains are unnecessary and may actually deter potential donors based on logistical issues. "

***********

And here's a report from Canada of a non-directed donor chain of liver exchange with all surgeries conducted simultaneously (also with the NDD donating to an incompatible patient-donor pair whose donor donated to a patient on the deceased donor waiting list).

Living donor liver paired exchange: A North American first  by Madhukar S. Patel  Zubaida Mohamed  Anand Ghanekar  Gonzalo Sapisochin  Ian McGilvray  Blayne A. Sayed  Trevor Reichman  Markus Selzner  Jed A. Gross  Zita Galvin  Mamatha Bhat  Les Lilly  Mark Cattral  Nazia Selzner, American Journal of Transplantation, First published: 10 June 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.16137 

Abstract: Paired organ exchange can be used to circumvent living donor‐recipient ABO incompatibilities. Herein, we present the first case of successful liver paired exchange in North America. This 2‐way swap required 4 simultaneous operations: 2 living donor hepatectomies and 2 living donor liver transplants. A nondirected anonymous living donor gift initiated this domino exchange, alleviating an ABO incompatibility in the other donor‐recipient pair. With careful attention to ethical and logistical issues, paired liver exchange is a feasible option to expand the donor pool for incompatible living liver donor‐recipient pairs.

*******

Here's a 2014 report from S. Korea:

Section 16. Update on Experience in Paired-Exchange Donors in Living Donor Liver Transplantation For Adult Patients at ASAN Medical Center by  Jung, Dong-Hwan1; Hwang, Shin1; Ahn, Chul-Soo1; Kim, Ki-Hun1; Moon, Deok-Bog1; Ha, Tae-Yong1; Song, Gi-Won1; Park, Gil-Chun1; Lee, Sung-Gyu, Transplantation: April 27, 2014 - Volume 97 - Issue - p S66-S69, doi: 10.1097/01.tp.0000446280.81922.bb

"Between January 2003 and December 2011, approximately 2,182 adult LDLT cases were included in this study. During this period, 26 paired-exchange donor LDLT cases were performed (1.2%).

"Results: Of the 26 paired-exchange donor LDLT cases, 22 pairs were matched due to ABO-incompatibility, and 4 pairs were matched because of cascade allocation of unrelated donors or relatively small graft volume to the recipients. A total of 28 living donors were included in the 26 paired-exchange donor LDLT cases because of inclusion of two dual-graft transplants. Elective surgery was performed in 22 cases, and urgent operation was performed in 4 cases. The overall 1-year and 5-year patient and graft survivals were both 96.2% and 90.1%, respectively.

"Conclusions : Our experience suggests that the paired-exchange donor program for adult LDLT seems to be a feasible modality to overcome donor ABO incompatibility."

**********

Here's a story of a liver exchange in Texas, between an incompatible pair and a compatible pair.

Saturday, December 28, 2019 A liver exchange in San Antonio, Texas

***********

Here's a liver exchange in Hong Kong between an incompatible pair and a compatible pair.

Friday, April 4, 2014 An unusual liver exchange in Hong Kong

***********

Here's a report from two major liver transplant centers in Hong Kong and S. Korea. The Korean team reported 16 donor exchanges conducted over a 6-year period.

Friday, April 9, 2010 Liver exchange

A liver exchange in San Antonio, Texas

Here's a story of a liver exchange in Texas, between an incompatible pair and a compatible pair.

Living organ donors reunite with recipients at University Hospital

"The hospital transplant teams paired the two living donors with two patients who needed transplants in April.
...
"Although D'Angelo and Sanchez were a match, Sanchez was approached about possibly being a living donor for someone else.

"The other recipient was Mark Blair.
Blair's daughter, Anna Moreno, wanted to be a donor for her father, but she was not a match.
...
"The transplant teams paired Moreno with D'Angelo and Sanchez with Blair.

"We can now have incompatible donors successfully donate to recipients that are not originally intended recipients but somebody else," said Dr. Tarunjeet Klair, surgical director of the Living Liver Donor Program for University Health System. "The eventual outcome is a successful transplant of multiple parties, and that's saving lives."

Liver Paired Exchange: Ready for Prime Time in North America?

An editorial in the November 2019 Liver Transplantation considers, among other things, how liver exchange might be more coercive than live liver donation, because real or imagined incompatibilities might no longer serve to excuse an ambivalent donor from going through with the donation. (I recall discussions like this at the outset of kidney exchange, and my sense is that, in those days, the doctors thought that they could still excuse ambivalent donors by indicating that they weren't healthy enough to donate...)

Liver Paired Exchange: Ready for Prime Time in North America?
Talia B. Baker M.D

"The evolution of kidney paired exchange (KPE) in the United States has expanded transplant options for ABO‐incompatible and human leukocyte antigen–incompatible living donor pairs.1 The success of KPE has prompted consideration of liver paired exchange (LPE). Although the idea seems promising, its application has been limited to a handful of centers in Asia.2-4
...
"In the United States, approximately 3,000 patients are removed from the liver waiting list each year because they become too ill or die prior to transplant.7 Although living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is established as the primary source of donor allografts in many parts of Asia, it constitutes approximately only 4% of liver transplants in the United States.7 The potential number of living donor and recipient pairs that might be suitable for LPE in the United States is unknown and largely unexplored.
...
"The indications for LPE are more complex than in KPE where immunological factors drive the process. In LPE, anatomical factors, such as hepatic mass (ie, graft‐to‐recipient weight ratio and percent of future liver remnant), and anatomical considerations, such as arterial and biliary variants, will also importantly be considered.
...
"coercion, which remains one of the greatest ethical concerns for the evaluation of any living donor, will have to be considered in a more robust manner. Concerns about coercion may be exacerbated by indirect exchanges, such as in LPE, because a reluctant or hesitant donor may no longer be able to invoke ABO incompatibility, size, or anatomical incompatibility as a reasonable and accepted way to withdraw from consideration as a living donor.9 ...
"Often, transplant centers are able to select the most willing donors based on their commitment to step forward, expressing unwavering interest and determination to donate. This system inherently allows willing, but ambivalent, donors to be excused based on objective medical measures (most commonly ABO incompatibility or anatomical issues) without having to admit their ambivalence. In contrast, LPE may remove or limit this potential by offering alternative options for exchanges, thereby inadvertently exposing or subjugating ambivalent donors. "

A (first) liver-kidney exchange

Here's a forthcoming paper in the American Journal of Transplantation:

Bi‐organ Paired Exchange – Sentinel Case of a Liver‐Kidney Swap
by Ana‐Marie Torres  Finesse Wong  Janine Sabatte‐Caspillo  Sandy Del Grosso John P Roberts  Nancy L Ascher  Chris E Freise  Brian K Lee
First published: 12 April 2019
https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.15386

Abstract: "Organ transplantation is the optimal treatment for patients with ESLD and ESRD. However, due to the imbalance in the demand and supply of deceased organs, most transplant centers worldwide have consciously pursued a strategy for living donation. Paired exchanges were introduced as a means to bypass various biologic incompatibilities (blood‐ and tissue‐typing), while expanding the living donor pool. This shift in paradigm has introduced new ethical concerns that have hitherto been unaddressed, especially with non‐directed, altruistic living donors. So far, transplant communities have focused efforts on separate liver‐ and kidney‐paired exchanges, whereas the concept of a trans‐organ paired exchange has been theorized and could potentially facilitate a greater number of transplants. We describe the performance of the first successful liver‐kidney swap."
******
The discussion of the ethical concerns mentioned in the abstract strike me as worth looking at, given that one of the authors, when she was president of the Transplantion Society, argued strenuously that poor patients should not be allowed to participate in American kidney exchange, for ethical reasons.

First, here are the practical steps they took:
"Our team debated the ethical underpinning of this swap. A discussion with the chair of the ethics committee at the time concluded that a full committee review was unnecessary."

Second, they considered the differential risks to the kidney and liver donors, and decided that this did not disallow the donations, since both kidney and liver donation is already accepted.

Finally they discuss the differential benefits to the liver and kidney recipients:
"Another area of contention is that donor-L’s recipient received remarkably less from a “life-enhancing” kidney transplant (rather than a truly “life-saving” liver transplant), despite the fact donor-L took on the substantially greater risk of donor hepatectomy. Our counterpoint is that the kidney recipient was spared from an extended dependency on dialysishad she stayed on the deceased donor waitlist (mortality on the kidney wait-list is 6-8% annually with a significant reduction in quality of life15,16). This does not even account for the superior allograft and patient survival outcomes that comes with a living vs. a deceased donor kidney transplant17. In fact, Merion18made the observation that the risk to patients on the kidney waitlist is not dissimilar to the liver waitlist mortality and reduction in quality of life for those with moderate MELD scores of 12-17. "

Fortunately for the patients involved, they decided that the benefits to the liver and kidney recipients were comparable. The implication is that if they had decided that the 'life-saving' benefits of a liver exceeded the 'life-enhancing' benefits of the kidney, then the exchange would have been unethical, and the ethical course of action would have been not to go ahead with it--which would likely have resulted in a quick death sentence for the liver patient, and perhaps a slower one for the kidney patient.

I'm glad that the dire decree was diverted.

It is this kind of ethical reasoning that led one of the authors to conclude that it would be unethical to go ahead with global kidney exchanges involving patient-donor pairs whose care had to be financed outside of their own countries' insurance coverage, so that, ethically, they could not be offered treatment even when financing was available. (It's lucky that the patients in this liver-kidney exchange apparently had good insurance, too.)
**********
The paper has an interesting back story in some speculative thoughts on market design.

The second reference in the paper is to a paper by computer scientists John Dickerson at Maryland and Tuomos Sandholm at CMU, proposing that multi-organ exchanges might substantially increase transplantation:
 Dickerson J, Sandholm T. Liver and multi-organ exchange. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2017;60:639

An unusual twist to the story is that it is the liver donor, eager to help her mother get a kidney transplant, who read the Dickerson-Sandholm paper and proposed the idea to the docs at UCSF.


Here's a press release from CMU, celebrating the event, and Sandholm's contributions:
Computer Science Idea Triggers First Kidney-Liver Transplant Swap
Sandholm says multi-organ exchanges could boost number of transplants

***********

Update: here's a May 11 story in the Washington Post

A daughter's gift to her mother saves two lives

Liver exchange in the U.S.?

 From  Liver Transplantation 24 677–686 2018 

Liver paired exchange: Can the liver emulate the kidney?
Ashish Mishra  Alexis Lo  Grace S. Lee  Benjamin Samstein  Peter S. Yoo Matthew H. Levine  David S. Goldberg  Abraham Shaked  Kim M. Olthoff Peter L. Abt

Abstract: Kidney paired exchange (KPE) constitutes 12% of all living donor kidney transplantations (LDKTs) in the United States. The success of KPE programs has prompted many in the liver transplant community to consider the possibility of liver paired exchange (LPE). Though the idea seems promising, the application has been limited to a handful of centers in Asia. In this article, we consider the indications, logistical issues, and ethics for establishing a LPE program in the United States with reference to the principles and advances developed from experience with KPE. 

...

"The potential number of donor and recipient pairs that might be suitable for LPE in the United States is unknown and is dependent on numerous factors. However, the Asan Medical Center experience from South Korea provides some perspective; among 2182 LDLT patients, 26 involved LPE.3 In the United States, most donors selected for LPE will likely be those where the donor is appropriate to donate with regard to the usual anatomical, medical, and psychosocial dimensions, but for 1 reason or another not appropriate for his or her intended recipient. Centers that evaluate living liver donors follow a stepwise approach to determining eligibility for donation. Some donors are rejected early in the evaluation process for obesity or other comorbidities, age, or being psychosocially unfit to proceed with donation.16, 17 Those who pass the initial screening process are assessed further for blood type, liver volumes, and other anatomical considerations, as well as general medical and psychosocial concerns. The donors who are rejected at this stage in the evaluation are the ones who could be considered for LPE. It is estimated that 3.5%‐17.0% of donors are rejected for ABOi, 4.1%‐14.0% for inadequate hepatic mass to support the recipient, and 1.5%‐6.0% due to vascular or biliary anatomic variations.17-20 There is considerable variation of these estimates based on the order of tests and the screening processes used to evaluate potential donors based on transplant center‐specific donor criteria. These barriers to donation represent opportunities for a variety of exchanges between donor and recipient pairs, such that the total number of lives saved through LDLT could be increased."
...

Examples of Potential LPE

In the following section, we provide some examples of potential LPE. If the history of KPE serves as a guide for the trajectory of LPE, the number of pairs involved, the indications for participation, and the complexity of exchanges are likely to increase (Fig. 2).

1. Two‐way swap: ABOi pair and a pair where the estimated weight of the donor lobe is inadequate for the intended recipient (Fig. 2A).
2. Three‐way swap: ABO compatible pair where the remnant volume is too small for the donor; ABOi donor to small child where the left lateral segment (LLS) is also too large for the child; and an ABOi pair (Fig. 2B).
3. Nondirected donor starts a chain (Fig. 2C).
4. Patient with familial amyloid polyneuropathy (FAP) receives a deceased donor organ or LDLT and starts a chain with a domino liver (Fig. 2D).

A liver for a kidney?

One consequence of the growth of kidney exchange is that there is more discussion of novel modes of exchange. Here's an article forthcoming in the American Journal of Transplantation that cautiously discusses the ethical issues that would be involved in a kidney-liver exchange.  I found the most interesting of the issues discussed to be those surrounding the excuse that medical teams give to prospective donors who don't really want to donate: they say e.g. that the kidney isn't suitable, or that the donor's kidney function isn't sufficient to allow him/her to donate. So the article discusses how this might pressure a reluctant donor if the question "but how about his/her liver"? could be asked...

The main case being discussed of course is one in which two lives could be saved by an exchange of donors, as in kidney exchange (or liver exchange, as has been employed a bit in Asia...).

(Incidentally, the article is written in the future hypothetical, but I wouldn't be shocked to hear that somewhere in the U.S. one such exchange has already taken place.)

New in the AJT:

A Liver for a kidney: Ethics of trans-organ paired exchange

Authors

• 
  

  
  

  
  

• 
  

  
  

• 
  

• 
  

• 
  

• Accepted manuscript online: 14 February 2018 
• DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14690
• American Journal of Transplantation (forthcoming)
• Abstract
• Living donation provides important access to organ transplantation, which is the optimal therapy for patients with end-stage liver or kidney failure. Paired exchanges have facilitated thousands of kidney transplants and enable transplantation when the donor and recipient are incompatible. However, frequently willing and otherwise healthy donors have contraindications to donation of the organ that their recipient needs. Trans-organ paired exchanges would enable a donor associated with a kidney recipient to donate a lobe of liver and a donor associated with a liver recipient to donate a kidney. This paper explores some of the ethical concerns that trans-organ exchange might encounter including unbalanced donor risks, the validity of informed consent, and effects on deceased organ donation.

Liver exchange: prospects and challenges

Might liver exchange be attempted in the U.S.?  (Maybe at Penn?). Here's a forthcoming article that considers how the challenges would be similar and different from the development of kidney exchange.

Liver Paired Exchange: Can the Liver Emulate the Kidney?
by Ashish Mishra, Alexis Lo, Grace S. Lee, Benjamin Samstein, Peter S. Yoo, Matthew H. Levine, David S. Goldberg, Abraham Shaked, Kim M. Olthoff, Peter L. Abt
Liver Transplantation, Accepted manuscript online: 10 February 2018

Abstract: Kidney paired exchange (KPE) constitutes 12 percent of all living donor kidney transplants in the United States. The success of KPE programs has prompted many in the liver transplant community to consider the possibility of liver paired exchange (LPE). Though the idea seems promising, the application has been limited to a handful of centers in Asia.  In this manuscript we consider the indications, logistical issues, and ethics for establishing a LPE program in the United States with reference to the principles and advances developed from experience with KPE. 

An unusual liver exchange in Hong Kong

Here's a paper describing a liver exchange in Hong Kong between one incompatible pair and one compatible pair.

Chan SC, Chok KSH, Sharr WW, Chan ACY, Tsang SHY, Dai WC, Lo CM. Samaritan donor interchange in living donor liver transplantation. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2014; 13(1): 105-109.

BACKGROUND: In order to overcome ABO blood group incompatibility, paired donor interchange has been practised in living donor liver transplantation. Liver transplantations using grafts donated by Samaritan living donors have been performed in Europe, North America, South Korea, and Hong Kong. Such practice is clearly on strong biological grounds although social and psychological implications could be far-reaching. Local experience has been satisfactory but is still limited. As few centers have this arrangement, its safety and viability are still being assessed under a clinical trial setting.
METHODS: Here we report a donor interchange involving an ABO-compatible pair with a universal donor and an ABO-incompatible pair with a universal recipient. This matching was not only a variation but also an extension of the donor interchange scheme.
RESULTS: The four operations (two donor hepatectomies and two recipient operations) were successful. All the two donors and the two recipients recovered well. Such donor interchange further supports the altruistic principle of organ donation in contrast to exchange for a gain.
CONCLUSIONS: Samaritan donor interchange certainly taxes further the ethical challenge of donor interchange. Although this practice has obvious biological advantages, such advantages have to be weighed against the potential increase in potential psychological risks to the subjects in the interchange. Further ethical and clinical evaluations of local and overseas experiences of donor interchange should guide future clinical practice in utilizing this potential organ source for transplantation.

Liver exchange

Living Donor Exchange Poses New Option for Liver Transplantation "Two major transplant centers in Hong Kong and South Korea released results from their paired donor exchange programs for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). A single paired exchange, performed by the Hong Kong team under emergency circumstances, was a success. The Korean team reported 16 donor exchanges conducted over a 6-year period were successful. Full details of this novel approach to organ transplantation appear in the April issue of Liver Transplantation."

And here are the two papers and abstracts: 

  Paired Donor Interchange to Avoid ABOIncompatible Living Donor Liver Transplantation, by See Ching Chan, Chung Mau Lo, Boon Hun Yong, Wilson J. C. Tsui, Kelvin K. C. Ng, and Sheung Tat Fan, Queen Mary Hospital, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China 

"We report an emergency paired donor interchange living donor liver transplant performed on January 13, 2009. The 4 operations (2 liver transplants) were performed simultaneously. The aim was to avoid 2 ABO-incompatible liver transplants. One recipient in acute liver failure underwent transplantation in a high-urgency situation. The abdomen of the other recipient had severe adhesions from previous spontaneous bacterial peritonitis that rendered the recipient operation almost impossible. The ethical and logistical issues are discussed. Approaches adopted in anticipation of potential adverse outcomes are explained in view of the higher donor and recipient mortality and morbidity rates in comparison with kidney transplantation." Liver Transpl 16:478-481, 2010 

  Exchange Living Donor Liver Transplantation to Overcome ABO Incompatibility in Adult Patients, by Shin Hwang, Sung-Gyu Lee, Deok-Bog Moon, Gi-Won Song, Chul-Soo Ahn, Ki-Hun Kim, Tae-Yong Ha, Dong-Hwan Jung, Kwan-Woo Kim, Nam-Kyu Choi, Gil-Chun Park, Young-Dong Yu, Young-Il Choi, Pyoung-Jae Park, and Hea-Seon Ha, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea 

"ABO incompatibility is the most common cause of donor rejection during the initial screening of adult patients with end-stage liver disease for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). A paired donor exchange program was initiated to cope with this problem without ABO-incompatible LDLT. We present our results from the first 6 years of this exchange adult LDLT program. Between July 2003 and June 2009, 1351 adult LDLT procedures, including 16 donor exchanges and 7 ABO-incompatible LDLT procedures, were performed at our institution. Initial donor-recipient ABO incompatibilities included 6 A to B incompatibilities, 6 B to A incompatibilities, 1 A to O incompatibility, 1 A+O (dual graft) to B incompatibility, 1 O to AB incompatibility, and 1 O to A incompatibility. Fourteen matches (87.5%) were ABO incompatible, but 2 (12.5%) were initially ABO-compatible. All ABO-incompatible donors were directly related to their recipients, but 2 compatible donors were each undirected and unrelated directed. After donor reassignment through paired exchange (n = 7) or domino pairing (n = 1), the donor-recipient ABO status changed to A to A in 6, B to B in 6, O to O in 1, A to AB in 1, A+O to A in 1, and O to B in 1, and this made all matches ABO identical (n = 13) or ABO-compatible (n = 3). Two pairs of LDLT operations were performed simultaneously on an elective basis in 12 and on an emergency basis in 4. All donors recovered uneventfully. Fifteen of the 16 recipients survived, but 1 died after 54 days. In conclusion, an exchange donor program for adult LDLT appears to be a feasible modality for overcoming donor-recipient ABO incompatibility."Liver Transpl 16:482-490, 2010. V

Living donor liver transplants

One of the reasons that kidney exchange is proving successful is that the dangers to donors seem to be quite low. In principle, liver exchange is also a possibility: a healthy donor can donate one lobe of his liver, and expect it to grow back. But a recent study of live-donor liver transplants at the pioneering University of Pittsburgh Medical Center reveals that the rate of complications for live liver donors may be quite high: UPMC liver transplant study finds flaws: Study reveals high rate of complications from UPMC procedures that used living donors .

"The study looked specifically at operations in which the larger, right lobe of the donor's liver was removed, and said that "no matter how carefully right lobar [living donor liver transplant] is applied, the historical verdict on the ethics of this procedure may be harsh. There is no precedent of a surgical procedure that exposes healthy persons to such a high risk on behalf of others."
While all 121 liver donors were still alive at the time the study was written, more than 10 percent of them also suffered serious postoperative complications.
The study also concluded that while some people argue that living donor transplants keep recipients from becoming critically ill while waiting for an organ, "in a reversal of fortune," 11 of the 121 recipients became so sick after their initial transplants that they had to get second livers from deceased donors. Only five of the 11 were still alive at the time the study was written."

The article also offers a window on the complicated decisions facing transplant surgeons generally (and not just liver transplant surgeons) about which patients should be offered a transplant. The news story quotes one doctor summarizing the issue as follows:

""I think the study's authors are ...also are bringing out the whole issue that we need to be careful and not just charge ahead and let cowboys do this procedure" "

Kidney Exchange coming to Spain (and liver exchange in HK)

Spain, which has the highest per-capita recovery rate of deceased donor organs in the world, is looking to expand its capacity for live donor kidney transplantation, by starting to use kidney exchange. Adn.es reports: España hará un trasplante cruzado de riñón.
"The first cross-kidney donation done in Spain will take place between two couples in June. "

HT to Flip Klijn

Update: for those who didn't click on the wonderful comment, here it is:
denisec said...
The first liver exchange in Hong Kong occurred a few weeks ago. It was described as "heaven sent" in the media: I save your hubby, you save my brother-in-law , and here it is (with a photo) in a Chinese newspaper

Further Update, June 2023: the above links didn't survive the passage of more than a decade, but you can get a little closer to the Hong Kong story at this Singapore link

I save your hubby, you save my brother-in-law [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Page 16

I save your hubby, you save my brother-in-law Two lives saved in a donor “swop”atHong Kong hospital HEwasalreadycountingdowntohislastbreath.Mr So Wai Lun, 36, had acute liver failure, but there was no suitable organ donor inHongKong. His sister-in-law, 26, was willing to donate part of her liver, but she couldn’t as she