DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES LIVER TRANSPLANTATION DATABASEIn recent years, survival following liver transplantation To evaluate the effect of donor age on graft and pahas improved markedly, with 1-year survival rates rising tient outcome after liver transplantation an analysis of a from 30% to 40% in the early 1980s to 70% to 80% in the large-scale cohort study was performed at three tertiary 1990s. 1,2 This change has been the result of improvements in referral liver transplant centers. Between April 1990 and immunosuppressive regimens, surgical techniques, recipient June 1994, 772 adults underwent an initial single-organ preparation, organ preservation, anesthesia techniques, timliver transplantion. The age of the donors averaged 35 ing of transplantation, and donor selection. The criteria for years; 193 (25%) were 50 or above, the age used to define donor selection or exclusion are more important than ever-''older'' donors. Groups were compared for demographic, as the demand for transplantation has risen faster than the clinical, and biochemical features. Outcome was meaavailability of donor livers, with increasing numbers of pasured using results of biochemical tests after transtients referred for liver transplantation and a rising waiting plantation and by graft and patient survival. Compared list mortality rate.2 with younger donors, older donors were more commonly A maximum upper age limit for liver donation has never women (59% vs. 33%: P°.001) and died of central nerbeen defined, but organs from donors above the age of 50 vous system causes (79% vs. 28%) as opposed to trauma years were rarely used 3,4 until the late 1980s when several (13% vs. 63%: P°.001). The recipients of the two groups reports on successful use of older donor livers were pubof donor livers did not differ in important respects. Howlished. 5-10 As the acceptable upper age limit has steadily inever, intraoperatively, livers from older donors were creased, the effects of older donor livers on graft function and more likely to be assessed as either ''poor'' or ''fair'' as survival deserve continuing reassessment. In recent analyopposed to ''good'' (17% vs. 4%: P°.001) by the harvesting ses, use of older liver donors was associated with decreases surgeon and to have initial ''poor'' or ''fair'' bile producin early liver function 11 and 6-month graft survival. 12,13 We tion (29% vs. 18%: P°.001). During the first week postophave evaluated the association between donor age and outeratively, the serum aminotransferase and bilirubin levcome of liver transplantation among patients entered into a els and prothrombin times were higher in recipients of large prospective database in which extensive information older than those of younger donor livers. During followwas available on the clinical characteristics of both donors up, graft survival was less for recipients of older donor and recipients. largely among recipients of older donor livers, the qualMayo Clinic Foundation, Rochester, MN; the University of Nebraska, ity of which was assessed ...