Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2018.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 21, 2018; 24(23): 2441-2456
Published online Jun 21, 2018. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i23.2441
Table 4 Older donors for living donor liver transplantation
Ref.Definition of older donorsn (older vs young)One-year survival (older vs young)Five-year survival (older vs young)Study type
Tanemura et al[58] (2012)50 yr old101 (24 vs 77)Older donor livers might have impaired regenerative abilityRS
Ono et al[60] (2011)50 yr old15 (6 vs 9)Liver regeneration is impaired with age after donor hepatectomyRS
Akamatsu et al[61] (2007)50 yr old299 (62 vs 237)85.0% vs 93.0%72.0% vs 87.0%RS
Kawano et al[62] (2014)NS12Donor age is a crucial factor affecting telomere length sustainability in hepatocytes after pediatric LDLTPS
Imamura et al[63] (2017)NS198A worse outcome might be associated with aging of the donorRS
Dayangac et al[64] (2011)50 yr old150 (28 vs 122)78.6% vs 83.4%NSRS
Yoshizumi et al[65] (2008)NS28Graft size, donor age, and patient status are the indicators of early graft functionRS
Han et al[66] (2014)55 yr old604 (26 vs 578)Median OS (M): 31.2 ± 31.3 vs 50.6 ± 40.6RS
Kamo et al[67] (2015)60 yr old1597 (69 vs 1528)69.5% vs 81.2%62.0% vs 79.3%RS
Shin et al[68] (2013)Donor-recipient age gradient > 20821Worse graft survival was observed if the donor is older than the recipient by > 20RS
Kubota et al[69] (2017)50 yr old315 (126vs 189)73.0% vs 80.9%39.7% vs 47.1%RS
Katsuragawa et al[70]NS24G/SLV and donor age were independent factors that affected graft survival ratesRS
Wang et al[72] (2015)50 yr old159 (10 vs 149)100% vs 93.0%90.0% vs 87.0%RS
Ikegami et al[73] (2008)50 yr old232 (32 vs 200)80.0% vs 81.7%73.8% vs 76.7%RS
Li et al[74] (2012)50 yr old129 (21 vs 108)90.0% vs 86.0%66.0% vs 75%RS
Goldaracena et al[75] (2016)50 yr old469 (91 vs 378)92.0% vs 96.0%83.0% vs 79.0%RS
Kim et al[76] (2017)55 yr old540 (42 vs 498)95.2% vs 94.6%NSRS