Living Donor Liver Transplantation in the Absence of Inferior Vena Cava: A Case Report

Usability of Inferior Vena Cava Interposition Graft During Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Is This Approach Always Necessary?

PURPOSE

To share the outcome of caval reconstruction technique in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with inferior vena cava (IVC) interposition grafting.

METHODS

Between January 2009 and December 2018, an artificial or homologous interposition vascular graft was used for the continuity of resected native (IVC) due to various reasons in 29 of 1740 patients who underwent LDLT at our institute. Demographic, clinical, and radiological data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixteen female and 13 male patients ranging 6-67 years of age were included. Right, left, and left lobe lateral segments were used in 22, 5, and 2 patients, respectively. The three leading LDLT indications were primary or idiopathic Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) (n = 12), alveolar echinococcosis (n = 7), and secondary BCS (n = 5). The three leading indications for IVC interposition grafting were thrombosis, dense fibrosis, and IVC invasion caused by tumor or echinococcosis. Homologous IVC graft was used in 17, homologous aortic graft in 7, and Dacron graft in 5 patients. Throughout the follow-up period, ascites ± pleural effusion and elevated liver enzymes were detected in 12 and 4 patients, respectively. Stenosis and/or thrombosis requiring one or more procedures such as 1-6 sessions balloon angioplasty, stent, and thrombus aspiration were observed in half of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Retrohepatic IVC damages are not a contraindication for LDLT. The presence or absence of venous collateral circulation is an important indicator of the need for IVC interposition graft use.

Hepatic Venous Outflow Reconstruction Directly Into the Right Atrium

OBJECTIVES

Living-donor liver transplant for BuddChiari syndrome is particularly challenging because of the need for venous outflow reconstruction as grafts from living donors lack vena cava. In addition, recipient vena cava may be thrombotic and fibrotic to such an extent that it would not allow graft venous outflow reconstruction. Under these circumstances, the right atrium provides an easily accessible alternative for venous outflow reconstruction, omitting the need for vena cava replacement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 3 patients who were treated using this technique were collected and evaluated with regard to surgical technique and outcomes.

RESULTS

All patients were alive without vascular complications after a mean follow-up of 67 months. The applied surgicaltechnique was similar except with regard to vena cava preservation.

CONCLUSIONS

During the natural course of the disease, venous collaterals form as chronic thrombosis extends into the vena cava. The vena cava can be safely resected in these patients to facilitate hepatectomy through dense adhesions, which is another common clinical problem in this disease. Consequently, venous outflow reconstruction to the right atrium creates the feasible opportunity of draining the graftliver without having to replace the vena cava.

Living-Donor Liver Transplantation for Budd-Chiari Syndrome: Case Series

BACKGROUND

Venous reconstruction in living-donor liver transplantation for Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) has challenges because the grafts from living donors lack vena cava, and hepatic venous anastomosis must be performed on an already-thrombosed and/or stenosed inferior vena cava. Several techniques are described to overcome this problem, and we represent our experience with 22 patients.

METHODS

Medical recordings of 22 patients were retrospectively collected, and disease-specific data as well as recordings about surgical technique were analyzed.

RESULTS

Creation of a wide, triangular de novo orifice was the main method used for venous drainage, which was used in 19 patients. The remaining 3 patients had totally thrombosed vena cava; thus, direct anastomosis to the supra-hepatic portion of the vena cava was used in 2 patients and an anastomosis to the right atrium was used in 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Venous reconstruction in BCS can be achieved without the use of patch-plasty, and the inferior vena cava can be safely resected in selected patients. Living-donor liver transplantation is a feasible option for the treatment of BCS, considering the scarcity of cavaderic donors.

Adult liver transplantation in the congenital absence of inferior vena cava

Whereas congenital absence of inferior vena cava observed in paediatric population more often than not, as an isolated or syndromic variety, this is seldom encountered in adult liver transplant recipients. There appear few sporadic reports in the literature on experience of such anomaly in adults. Given the rarity of situation, surprising encounters of such anomalies may pose challenge to the unprepared transplant surgeon and unfavourable outcomes may even have resulted in under-reportage of this condition. In this brief report we document our recent experience with two such cases and this is supplemented with extensive reference to the literature on classification of such anomalies with the endeavour to document implications of such in the adult liver transplant setting.

Liver transplantation in a patient with complex anomaly of the inferior vena cava

BACKGROUND

After the introduction of noninvasive imaging exams, congenital anomalies of the inferior vena cava (IVC) have become more commonly recognized. We report the first successful orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) performed in an asymptomatic adult with complex IVC anomaly: duplication of the infrarenal IVC, azygos continuation of the IVC, agenesia of the hepatic portion of the IVC and presence of several anomalous veins communicating the common iliac vein and the IVC of one side with the contralateral side.

METHODS

This complex anomaly was diagnosed with a venous abdominal angio CT.

RESULTS

At liver transplantation, the short suprahepatic portion of the IVC was identified and clamped. The right, middle, and left hepatic veins were sectioned and joined in a single, wide cuff, using venoplasty. This single orifice was anastomosed to the suprahepatic IVC of the new liver. No venovenous bypass was employed. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course. A post transplantation venous abdominal angio CT showed normal blood flow at the anastomosis of the hepatic veins of the receptor and the IVC of the new liver.

CONCLUSIONS

This report is important to alert liver transplant teams of the possibility of complex IVC in asymptomatic adult individuals. Identification of these anatomical anomalies is vital to reduce the risk of serious hemorrhage and other operative complications during OLT.