Transient portocaval shunt for a small-for-size graft in living donor liver transplantation

Impact of preserved collateral veins on small-for-size grafts in living donor liver transplantation

AIM

Graft size is a critical issue in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We hypothesized that too much portal flow could possibly be diverted into pre-existing collateral veins, alleviating small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) in LDLT. This study evaluated the impact of the preserved collateral veins in the outcomes of LDLT using a small-for-size graft.

METHODS

For patient safety, a graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) <0.8% was strictly confined to patients with collateral veins (group A), and the patient group was compared in a 1:3 ratio to a matched group of patients with GRWR ≥0.8% (group B) using propensity score analysis.

RESULTS

Forty and 120 patients were included in group A and B, respectively. No significant differences in baseline patient characteristics were observed between the two groups except for graft weight and GRWR. The lowest GRWR was 0.4%. The graft portal inflow showed no significant differences for 7 days after graft implantation, ranging from 1668 to 5100 mL/min. Small-for-size syndrome occurred in no patients (0.0%) in group A and in 10 (8.3%) in group B (P = 0.067). Overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were not different between the two groups (85.0%, 82.5%, and 82.5% vs. 92.5%, 86.7%, and 85.0%, respectively; P = 0.670).

CONCLUSION

Pre-existing collateral veins saved during surgery may have a reserve buffer for excessive portal flow to obviate SFSS in LDLT.

Small-for-size syndrome in live donor liver transplantation-Pathways of injury and therapeutic strategies

Due to the severe organ shortage and the increasing gap between the supply and demand for donor grafts, live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an accepted and alternative technique for the expansion of the donor pool. However, donor safety and good recipient outcomes must be balanced regarding risk stratification and decision-making within this patient population. Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is one of the complications encountered after LDLT, thus increasing the burden of optimizing donor graft selection and effective treatments during its occurrence. A graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) <0.8 predisposes the graft to SFSS. However, other factors may induce this complication even without a graft-to-patient size mismatch. Several strategies to prevent this complication include portal vein flow and liver outflow modulation, as well as pharmacological treatment. Also, as an entity with a multifactorial etiology, outcomes vary between right-lobe, left-lobe, and posterior-lobe donation among series encountered in the literature. In this review, we analyze the pathophysiology and classification of this complication, the state-of-the-art on management of SFSS, and the outcomes regarding the best treatment strategy on this patient population.

Graft-to-recipient weight ratio lower to 0.7% is safe without portal pressure modulation in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation with favorable conditions

BACKGROUND

The low graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is one of the major risk factors affecting graft survival. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether the lower limit of the GRWR can be safely reduced without portal pressure modulation in right-lobe LDLT.

METHODS

From 2005 to 2011, 317 consecutive patients from a single institute underwent LDLT with right-lobe grafts without portal pressure modulation. Of these, 23 had a GRWR of less than 0.7% (group A), 27 had a GRWR of ≥0.7%, <0.8% (group B), and 267 had a GRWR of more than and equal to 0.8% (group C). Medical records, including recipient, donor, operation factors, laboratory findings and complications were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The baseline demographics showed low model for end-stage liver disease score (mean 16.3+/-8.9) and high percentage of hepatocellular carcinoma (231 patients, 72.9%). Three groups by GRWR demonstrated similar characteristics except recipient body mass index and donor gender. For small-for-size syndrome, there were 3 (13.0%) in group A, 1 (3.7%) in group B, and 2 patients (0.7%) in group C (P<0.001). Hepatic artery thrombosis was more frequently observed in group A than in groups B and C (8.7% vs 3.7% vs 1.9%, P=0.047). However, among the three groups, graft survival rates at 1 year (100% vs 96.3% vs 93.6%) and 3 years (91.7% vs 73.2% vs 88.1%) were not different (P=0.539). In laboratory measurements, there was no group difference in total bilirubin and albumin. However, prothrombin time was longer in group A within postoperative 1 week and platelet count was lower in groups A and B within postoperative 1 month.

CONCLUSION

A GRWR lower to 0.7% is safe and does not need to modulate portal pressure in adult-to-adult LDLT using the right-lobe in favorable conditions including low model for end-stage liver disease score.

Outcome of patients undergoing right lobe living donor liver transplantation with small-for-size grafts

AIM: To investigate the outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) recipients transplanted with small-for-size grafts (SFSGs).

METHODS: Between November 2001 and December 2010, 196 patients underwent LDLT with right lobe liver grafts at our center. Recipients were divided into 2 treatment groups: group A with an actuarial graft-to-recipient weight ratio (aGRWR) < 0.8% (n = 45) and group B with an aGRWR ≥ 0.8% (n = 151). We evaluated serum liver function markers within 4 wk after transplantation. We also retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of these patients for potential effects related to the recipients, the donors and the transplantation procedures based upon a review of their medical records.

RESULTS: Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) developed in 7 of 45 patients (15.56%) in group A and 9 of 151 patients (5.96%) in group B (P = 0.080). The levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase in group A were higher than those in group B during early period after transplantation, albeit not significantly. The cumulative 1-, 3- and 5-year liver graft survival rates were 82.22%, 71.11% and 71.11% for group A and 81.46%, 76.82%, and 75.50% for group B patients, respectively (P = 0.623). However, univariate analysis of risk factors associated with graft survival in group A demonstrated that the occurrence of SFSS after LDLT was the only significant risk factor affecting graft survival (P < 0.001). Furthermore, multivariate analysis of our data did not identify any additional significant risk factors accounting for poor graft survival.

CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that LDLT recipients with an aGRWR < 0.8% may have liver graft outcomes comparable to those who received larger size grafts. Further studies are required to ascertain the safety of using SFSGs.

Small for size syndrome following living donor and split liver transplantation

The field of liver transplantation is limited by the availability of donor organs. The use of living donor and split cadaveric grafts is one potential method of expanding the donor pool. However, primary graft dysfunction can result from the use of partial livers despite the absence of other causes such as vascular obstruction or sepsis. This increasingly recognised phenomenon is termed “Small-for-size syndrome” (SFSS). Studies in animal models and humans have suggested portal hyperperfusion of the graft combined with poor venous outflow and reduced arterial flow might cause sinusoidal congestion and endothelial dysfunction. Graft related factors such as graft to recipient body weight ratio < 0.8, impaired venous outflow, steatosis > 30% and prolonged warm/cold ischemia time are positively predictive of SFSS. Donor related factors include deranged liver function tests and prolonged intensive care unit stay greater than five days. Child-Pugh grade C recipients are at relatively greater risk of developing SFSS. Surgical approaches to prevent SFSS fall into two categories: those targeting portal hyperperfusion by reducing inflow to the graft, including splenic artery modulation and portacaval shunts; and those aiming to relieve parenchymal congestion. This review aims to examine the controversial diagnosis of SFSS, including current strategies to predict and prevent its occurrence. We will also consider whether such interventions could jeopardize the graft by compromising regeneration.

Impact of splenectomy in patients with liver cirrhosis: Results from 18 patients in a single center experience

AIM

  With the recent advances in medical or surgical treatments in chronic hepatic disorders, the indications for splenectomy in hepatic disorders have greatly expanded. We performed splenectomy for cirrhotic patients and investigated the effects of splenectomy on hepatic functional reserve and nutrition metabolism.

METHODS

  Eighteen patients (Child-Pugh B/C: 12/6; Child-Pugh A: excluded) who underwent splenectomy at our institute between 2005 and 2008 were enrolled. Twelve patients (67%) had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), eight of whom met the Milan criteria.

RESULTS

  Overall survival rate was 83.3% at 1 year and 62.7% at 2 years. The survival rate of six patients with liver cirrhosis classified a Child-Pugh C was 80.0% at 1 year and 60.0% at 2 years. Three patients underwent hepatic resection and nine patients received ablation therapy against hepatocelluar carcinoma. Portal pressure decreased after splenectomy in most patients (mean decrease, 4.7 mmHg). Four weeks after the operation, the markers of hepatic functional reserve, indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min (ICGR15) and Technetium-99m-galactosyl human serum albumin value ((99m)Tc-GSA), improved from 38.5% to 35.1% and from 0.773 to 0.788 (LHL15), respectively. The non-protein respiratory quotient (npRQ) did not change in short period after the operation. Other outcomes, including liver function test in cirrhotic patients with long-term (1 year) follow-up after splenectomy (n = 7), did not improve significantly. Post-operative complications included portal thrombus (n = 2), ascites (n = 2) were observed in six patients (33%).

CONCLUSION

  Splenectomy improved hepatic functional reserve and nutritional metabolism in some cases. However, the long-term outcomes should still be evaluated.

New prediction factors of small-for-size syndrome in living donor adult liver transplantation for chronic liver disease

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS), which is characterized by synthetic dysfunction and prolonged cholestasis, is a major cause of worse short-term prognoses after living donor adult liver transplantation (LDALT). However, the risks of SFSS remain unclear. The aim of this study was to clarify the risks of SFSS, which were analysed in 172 patients who underwent LDALT for chronic liver disease. Graft types included left lobe with caudate lobe graft (n = 110) and right lobe graft (n = 62). Thirty-four cases (24 with left lobe grafts and 10 with right lobe grafts) were determined as SFSS. SFSS developed even if the actual graft-to-recipient standard liver volume ratio was >40%. Logistic regression analysis revealed three independent factors associated with SFSS development in left and right lobe grafts: donor age, actual graft-to-recipient native liver volume ratio, and Child's score. Donor age and actual graft-to-recipient native liver volume ratio may become predictive factors for SFSS development in left and right lobe grafts in patients undergoing LDALT.

Recent role of splenectomy in chronic hepatic disorders

For years splenectomy in hepatic disorders has been indicated only for the treatment of gastro-esophageal varices. However, with recent advances in medical and surgical treatments for chronic hepatic disorders, the use of splenectomy has been greatly expanded, such that splenectomy is used for reversing hypersplenism, for applying interferon treatment for hepatitis C, for treating hyperdynamic portal circulation associated with intractable ascites, and for controlling portal pressure during small grafts in living donor liver transplantation. Such experiences have shown the importance of portal hemodynamics, even in cirrhotic livers. Recent advances in surgical techniques have enabled surgeons to perform splenectomy more safely and less invasively, but the procedure still has considerable clinical outcomes. Splenectomy in hepatic disorders may become a more common procedure with expanded indications. However, it should also be noted that the long-term effects of splenectomy, in terms of improved hematological or hepatic function, is still not guaranteed. Moreover, the impact of splenectomy on immunologic status remains unclear and needs to be elucidated in both experimental and clinical settings.