Right lobe split liver graft versus whole liver transplantation: A systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Advancements in surgical techniques and experience of donor-recipient pairing has led to a wider use of right split liver grafts in adults. An update meta-analysis was conducted to compare right split liver graft (RSLG) and whole liver transplantation (WLT) using traditional and cumulative approaches.

METHODS: Databases were searched for relevant articles over the previous 20 years (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar). Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed and random effects models. Patient and graft survival were obtained using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.

RESULTS: Donors were significantly younger in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = -12.06 [-16.29 to -7.83]; P < .001). In addition, the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was significantly lower in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = -2.45 [-4.61 to -.28]; P = .03). However, cold ischaemia time was significantly longer by 1 h in the RSLG group than in the WLT group (MD = 57 [20.63-92.73]; P = .002). Overall biliary, vascular, and outflow tract complications and hepatic artery thrombosis were significantly lower in the WLT group than in the RSLG group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.75 [1.35-2.27], P < .001; OR = 1.91 [1.37-2.65], P = .006; Peto OR = 1.83 [1.19-2.82], P = .006; and Peto OR = 2.07 [1.39-3.10], P = .004, respectively). However, no difference in patient and graft survival was noted between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS: Although the RSLG group had a higher postoperative complication rate than the WLT group, equal patient and graft survival benefits were observed.