A retrospective analysis of outcomes and complications of living- and deceased-donor split-liver transplantation in Johannesburg, South Africa

South African transplant centres are faced with significant challenges in meeting the need for liver transplantation, owing to the low and ever-decreasing number of deceased-donor organs. To increase organ utility, deceased-donor split-liver transplant (DDSLT) and living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) programmes were initiated in the Wits Transplant Unit. To evaluate outcomes of the LDLT and DDSLT programmes. A retrospective analysis of de-identified recipient and donor variables from all adult and paediatric DDSLTs and LDLTs conducted between 2013 and 2021 was performed. Comparison of categorical study variables between graft types was done with the χ2 test. Continuous variables were compared by means of the independent samples t-test. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to examine the effect of graft type on recipient and graft survival. All comparisons were made unadjusted, and adjusted for recipient age, recipient ethnicity, donor sex, and graft-weight-to-recipient-weight ratio (GWRWR) (for the paediatric cohort); and for donor age and GWRWR (for the adult cohort). A total of 181 paediatric and 48 adult liver transplants have been performed since the inception of the two programmes. Chronic liver failure, specifically intra- and extrahepatic cholestatic disease, was our main indication for liver transplantation in both cohorts. There were no significant differences between the DDSLTs and LDLTs in respect of pre- or post-discharge intervention, in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and recipient or graft survival within both the paediatric and adult groups. Our overall 1- and 3-year survival estimates (95% confidence intervals) were 77% (70% - 83%) and 71% (64% - 78%) for the paediatric cohort, and 77% (62% - 87%) and 66% (50% - 78%) for the adult cohort, respectively. The results of this study demonstrate comparable outcomes between DDSLT and LDLT, indicating that both methods are effective approaches to optimise organ utilisation for liver transplantation within our setting.