PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 15, 2026Liver Transplantation3 citations

Donor Type, social deprivation, and long‑term outcomes in pediatric liver transplantation: A 30‑year population‑based cohort

View Full Paper
TYToshifumi YodoshiMKM. Ellen KuenzigFTFurong Tang

Key Points

  • To compare long-term outcomes in pediatric liver transplantation between living donor and deceased donor types and explore how socioeconomic status affects these outcomes.
  • Linked clinical data from pediatric liver transplants in Ontario from 1991–2021.
  • Analyzed data from 449 recipients (189 LDLT, 260 DDLT) who underwent first transplant.
  • Compared patient survival, graft survival, and chronic kidney disease risk between LDLT and DDLT.
  • Examined the influence of socioeconomic status on outcomes for both donor types.
  • LDLT recipients showed superior patient and graft survival compared to DDLT recipients.
  • DDLT was associated with a higher mortality risk (aHR 2.1) and graft failure risk (aHR 2.1).
  • Chronic kidney disease occurrence was significantly higher in DDLT recipients (adjusted HR 5.3).
  • Lower neighborhood income and higher material deprivation worsened outcomes for DDLT recipients, but not for LDLT recipients.

Abstract

Background & Aims: Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) reduces wait‑list mortality in children, but its long‑term advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) and how socioeconomic context shapes outcomes in a universal healthcare system remain uncertain. We compared long‑term outcomes after pediatric LDLT versus DDLT and evaluated modification by socioeconomic status (SES). Approach & Results: We linked clinical data for pediatric liver transplants in Ontario, Canada from 1991–2021 to provincial health administrative data, yielding 449 recipients (189 LDLT, 260 DDLT) who underwent first transplant. Over the 30-year period, LDLT recipients had superior patient and graft survival. After adjustment, DDLT was associated with a higher risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio aHR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0–4.3), graft failure (aHR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0–4.3), and chronic kidney disease (adjusted subdistribution HR 5.3, 95% CI 1.4–15.3), compared to LDLT. SES profoundly modified long-term outcomes: among DDLT recipients, lower neighborhood income and higher material deprivation were strongly linked to worse survival and increased graft loss. In contrast, LDLT moderated these socioeconomic disadvantages, with recipients showing comparable outcomes regardless of their SES (P for interaction <0.01). Conclusions: In this population-based cohort study, LDLT was associated with significantly better long-term patient and graft survival and a lower risk of chronic kidney disease compared to DDLT. Socioeconomic disadvantage negatively impacted outcomes primarily among DDLT recipients, highlighting the need to improve equitable access to LDLT and to strengthen targeted post-transplant support for socioeconomically vulnerable families.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Yodoshi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69df2c1de4eeef8a2a6b1256https://doi.org/10.1097/lvt.0000000000000877
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The impact of socioeconomic deprivation on liver transplantation2024 · 13 citations
  2. 2Pregnancy after liver transplant: maternal and perinatal outcomes2021 · 24 citations
  3. 3Incidence of Major Cardiovascular Events in Immigrants to Ontario, Canada2015 · 129 citations
  4. 4The validity of pediatric cancer diagnoses in a population-based general cancer registry in Ontario, Canada2016 · 22 citations
  5. 5Ensuring long-term equity after pediatric liver transplantation2020 · 1 citations