Right lobe living donor liver transplantation

An Elbow Patch Reconstruction Technique for Narrowed Remnant Portal Veins during Right Lobe Living Donor Hepatectomy: A Rescue Surgery

Background: Treatment of established portal vein narrowing after living donor hepatectomy is challenging. We aimed to present a new approach termed the "elbow patch reconstruction technique" to correct the narrowed remnant portal vein just or late after right lobe living donor hepatectomy. Methods: Demographic and clinical data of 12 living liver donors with narrowed remnant portal veins and treated with the "elbow patch reconstruction technique" were prospectively collected and retrospectively evaluated. Anatomic variation of the portal vein was defined in accordance with the Nakamura classification; six of the living liver donors had type A, three had type B, and the remaining three had type C. In eight of the living liver donors with a narrowed remnant portal vein, diagnosis was detected by intraoperative Doppler ultrasonography and visual inspection by experienced transplant surgeons in the living donor hepatectomy procedure. In the remaining four living liver donors, diagnosis was performed postoperatively when elevation of liver enzymes was noticed during the routine liver function test and Doppler US. The diagnosis was confirmed by multidetector computed tomography. Results: Data from nine males and three females aged 18 to 54 years were analyzed. All of the living liver donors were followed up for a median of 1710 days (min-max: 1178-4447 days; IQR: 1516 days), and none of the living liver donors had any structural or functional complications in the portal vein. Conclusions: Narrowing remnant portal veins are rare, but they are a life-threatening complication in living liver donors, and this condition requires urgent management. Image guided interventions and narrowed segment resection with end-to-end anastomosis using a vascular graft carried a potential risk for thrombosis and restenosis. To avoid these complications, we shared a technique named "elbow patch reconstruction technique". This technique can be very effective in relieving the narrowing of the remnant portal vein after right lobe living donor hepatectomy.

Understanding the living-related pediatric liver transplantation donor's decision process: A questionnaire-based retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the donor characteristics and understand the sociocultural and familial aspects of the decision to donate for living donor liver transplant.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study done in the Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Hepatology of a liver transplant centre. We enrolled the consenting donors of pediatric liver transplantation between January 2020 and January 2022. The study was conducted through an anonymized questionnaire which was drafted in a multiple-choice format. The questionnaire had three domains having questions pertaining to demographic details, donor characteristics and sociofamilial aspects of the decision-making process.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 50 donors, 23 males (46%) and 27 females (54%), with the mean age being 31.8 ± 5.6 years. Parent-to-child was the most frequent relationship (n = 39, 78%). More than half of our donors had annual income <2.5 lakh/annum or <3500 USD (n = 27, 54%). Twenty-six (52%) responders had >4 members in their family; 62% were residing in urban areas and 52% of the donors were graduates. The main source of information regarding the feasibility of living donor liver transplantation was primary physicians in 46%. Financial management was the main hurdle in 72%. Majority (74%) denied any effect on their marital relationship and 6% of donors thought that the degree of information provided to them before the transplantation regarding donation was insufficient.

CONCLUSION

Our study serves as an essential tool for health professionals to provide sufficient support to the donor. Clinical outcomes and cost must be part of the discussion between caregivers, health professionals and fund contributors.

Strategy for Selective Middle Hepatic Vein Reconstruction in Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Right Lobe Graft: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to verify the safety and feasibility of our selection criteria for middle hepatic vein (MHV) reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using right lobe grafts.

METHODS

A total of 153 LDLTs were performed using right lobe grafts in a tertiary hospital from 2006 to 2016. Among them, 52 cases without MHV reconstruction were compared with 101 recipients who underwent LDLT using right lobe graft with MHV reconstruction. Both groups were compared regarding indications for reconstruction, short-term and long-term complications, operative details, and outcomes.

RESULTS

The two groups differed only in cold ischemic time (108.19 ± 49.81 minutes vs 146.37 ± 58.74 minutes) preoperatively. Short-term posttransplant outcomes, long-term overall survival, and long-term disease-free survival showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. After propensity score matching for both groups with and without MHV reconstruction to eliminate selection bias, the 2 groups were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that our selection criteria for performing MHV reconstruction in LDLT using right lobe graft were feasible and safe. A routine MHV reconstruction is not necessary if the right lobe graft graft-to-recipient weight ratio is ≥1.0, right hepatic vein draining territory volume is ≥0.8, and recipient Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score is <20.

Clamp-Crush Technique Versus Harmonic Scalpel for Hepatic Parenchymal Transection in Living Donor Hepatectomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Hepatic parenchymal transection is the most invasive step in donor operation. During this step, blood loss and unintended injuries to the intrahepatic structures and hepatic remnant may occur. There is no evidence to prove the ideal techniques for hepatic parenchymal transection. The aim of this study is to compare the safety, efficacy, and outcome of clamp-crush technique versus harmonic scalpel as a method of parenchymal transection in living-donor hepatectomy.

METHODS

Consecutive living liver donors, undergoing right hemi-hepatectomy, during the period between May 2015 and April 2016, were included in this prospective randomized study. Cases were randomized into two groups; group (A) harmonic scalpel group and group (B) Clamp-crush group.

RESULTS

During the study period, 72 cases underwent right hemi-hepatectomy for adult living donor liver transplantation and were randomized into two groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding preoperative demographic and radiological data. Longer operation time and hepatectomy duration were found in group B. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding blood loss, blood loss during hepatectomy, and blood transfusion. More unexpected bleeding events occurred in group A. Higher necrosis at the cut margin of the liver parenchyma was noted in group A. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding postoperative ICU stay, hospital stay, postoperative morbidities, and readmission rates.

CONCLUSION

Clamp-crush technique is advocated as a simple, easy, safe, and cheaper method for hepatic parenchymal transection in living donors.

The influence of the middle hepatic vein and its impact on outcomes in right lobe living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

In adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation, the decision to include the middle hepatic vein (MHV) remains controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 50 R-LDLTs between January 2008 and June 2016 was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one procedures were performed using a MHV+ graft (42.0%) and 29 procedures using a MHV- graft (58%). MHV- donors were taller (173 vs 166 cm, p = 0.004) with a larger standard liver volume (1351 vs 1245 mls, p = 0.014) compared to MHV+ donors. The duration of operation for donors was significantly longer in the MHV+ group (530 (313-975) mins) compared to the MHV- group (489 (336-708) mins) (p = 0.029). Similarly, the operative time for recipients was longer in the MHV+ group (660 (428-831) mins) compared to MHV- (579 (359-1214) mins) (p = 0.023). MHV- grafts were heavier compared to MHV+ grafts (918 vs 711 g, p = 0.017). Recipient mortality rates and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were comparable (p = 0.411). All donors were well at last review.

CONCLUSION

Both MHV+ and MHV- grafts are safe for the donor and recipient. The decision to take the MHV should be based on specific donor-recipient characteristics.

Middle hepatic vein reconstruction in adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation improves recipient survival

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and necessity of middle hepatic vein (MHV) reconstruction in adult-to-adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remain controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the survival beneficiary of MHV reconstructions in LDLT.

METHODS

We compared the clinical outcomes of liver recipients with MHV reconstruction (n = 101) and without MHV reconstruction (n = 43) who underwent LDLT using right lobe grafts at our institution from January 2006 to May 2017.

RESULTS

The overall survival (OS) rate of recipients with MHV reconstruction was significantly higher than that of those without MHV reconstruction in liver transplantation (P = 0.022; 5-yr OS: 76.2% vs 58.1%). The survival of two segments (segments 5 and 8) hepatic vein reconstruction was better than that of the only one segment (segment 5 or segment 8) hepatic vein reconstruction (P = 0.034; 5-yr OS: 83.6% vs 67.4%). The survival of using two straight vascular reconstructions was better than that using Y-shaped vascular reconstruction in liver transplantation with two segments hepatic vein reconstruction (P = 0.020; 5-yr OS: 100% vs 75.0%). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that MHV tributary reconstructions were an independent beneficiary prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio=0.519, 95% CI: 0.282-0.954, P = 0.035). Biliary complications were significantly increased in recipients with MHV reconstruction (28.7% vs 11.6%, P = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

MHV reconstruction ensured excellent outflow drainage and favored recipient outcome. The MHV tributaries (segments 5 and 8) should be reconstructed as much as possible to enlarge the hepatic vein anastomosis and reduce congestion.

Readdressing the Middle Hepatic Vein in Right Lobe Liver Donation: Triangle of Safety

For equipoising donor safety and optimal recipient outcomes, we adopted an algorithmic "triangle of safety" approach to retrieve 3 types of right lobe liver grafts (RLGs), namely, the modified extended right lobe graft (MERLG), the partial right lobe graft (PRLG), and the modified right lobe graft (MRLG). Reconstruction to achieve a single wide anterior sector outflow was ensured in all patients. We present donor and recipient outcomes based on our approach in 665 right lobe (RL) living donor liver transplantations (LDLTs) performed from January 2013 to August 2015. There were 347 patients who received a MERLG, 117 who received a PRLG, and 201 who received a MRLG. A right lobe graft (RLG) with a middle hepatic vein was retrieved only in 3 out of 18 donors with steatosis >10%. Cold ischemia time was significantly more and remnant volume was less in the MRLG group. Of the donors, 29.3% had complications (26% Clavien-Dindo grade I, II) with no statistically significant difference among the groups. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was higher in the MERLG group. There were 34 out of 39 with a graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) of <0.7% who received a MERLG with inflow modulation. Out of 4 patients who developed small-for-size syndrome in this group, 2 died. The 90-day patient survival rate was similar among different GRWRs and types of RLG. In conclusion, a selective and tailored approach for RL donor hepatectomy based on optimal functional volume and metabolic demands not only addresses the key issue of double equipoise in LDLT but also creates a safe path for extending the limits.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Technical Innovations

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has found a place to serve the end-stage liver disease community as the donor safety and recipient suitability has been elucidated. Donor safety is of paramount importance and transplant programs must continue endeavors to maintain the highest possible standards. At the same time, adequacy of grafts based on recipient clinical status via their model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and volumetric studies to achieve a GRBWR >0.8, along with special attention to anatomic tailoring and portal venous flow optimization are necessary for successful transplantation. Technical innovations have improved sequentially the utility and availability of LDLT.

Predictive Factors of Liver Dysfunction After Right Hemihepatectomy for Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living liver donors represent a special group of patients. They are healthy individuals who are exposed to a major surgery, in which the dominant liver proportion is extracted as a graft. Of all potential donor-related morbidities, posthepatectomy liver dysfunction (PHLD) is the most significant as it may be directly related to donor mortality. We aimed to review our data of adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) utilizing the right hemiliver grafts to determine the incidence and potential predictors for the development of PHLD, defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery.

METHODS

We reviewed the data of all adult living donors who underwent right hemihepatectomy during the period between May 2004 and 2016.

RESULTS

During the study period, 434 cases underwent right hemihepatectomy for adult LDLT. We divided our cases into 2 groups according to the occurrence of PHLD. A significant lower residual liver volume and percentage were noted in PHLD group. Longer intensive care unit stay and hospital stay, and more postoperative morbidities, were observed in PHLD group. PHLD occurred in 50 cases (11.5%), and most of them were grade A (47 cases [10.8%]). Two cases (0.5%) had grade B requiring diuretic therapy, and 1 case (0.2%) had grade C requiring ultrasound guided tube drainage and surgical exploration finally.

CONCLUSIONS

We should not underestimate the risks of liver donation surgery, especially when utilizing the right hemiliver graft. Donor safety should be ensured by accurate preoperative volumetric assessment of the remnant liver and remnant liver volume limitations must be strictly followed.

Living donor liver transplantation: eliminating the wait for death in end-stage liver disease?

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (A2ALDLT), outside of Asia, remains an important yet underutilized gift of life. For patients with end-stage liver disease, A2ALDLT is a proven transplantation option, with lower waiting list mortality and suffering, and equivalent or better allograft and patient survival than deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The risks to living donors and the benefit to their recipients have been carefully defined with long-term level 1 and 2 evidence-based study. An overview of the development and practice of living donor liver transplant (LDLT), including donor and recipient surgical allograft innovation, is provided. The issues of recipient selection, outcomes and morbidity, including disease-variable study and challenges past and present are presented in comparison with DDLT cohorts, and future insights are described. Central to practice is the careful and concise review of donor evaluation and selection and donor outcome, morbidity, quality of life and present and future strategies for donor advocacy and growth of the technique.

Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Hepatectomy for Live Liver Donors

Objective

To document the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy in comparison with open liver resection for living donor liver transplantation.

Methods

Medline database, EMASE and Cochrane library were searched for original studies comparing laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LLDH) and open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) by January 2015. Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate donors’ perioperative outcomes.

Results

Nine studies met selection criteria, involving 1346 donors of whom 318 underwent LLDH and 1028 underwent OLDH. The Meta analysis demonstrated that LLDH group had less operative blood loss [patients 1346; WMD: -56.09 mL; 95%CI: -100.28-(-11.90) mL; P = 0.01], shorter hospital stay [patients 737; WMD: -1.75 d; 95%CI: -3.01-(-0.48) d; P = 0.007] but longer operative time (patients 1346; WMD: 41.05 min; 95%CI: 1.91–80.19 min; P = 0.04), compared with OLDH group. There were no significant difference in other outcomes between LLDH and OLDH groups, including overall complication, bile leakage, postoperative bleeding, pulmonary complication, wound complication, time to dietary intake and period of analgesic use.

Conclusions

LLDH appears to be a safe and effective option for LDLT. It improves donors’ perioperative outcomes as compared with OLDH.

[Advisability of biliary drainage in liver fragments reconstruction]

AIM

to estimate the effect of decompressive stented drainage of biliary anastomosis on incidence of biliary complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

294 patients aged from 5 months to 61 years (mean 13.8±0.81) were enrolled. They underwent liver fragments transplantation in the Department of Liver Transplantation of Petrovsky Russian Research Center of Surgery for the period from March 1997 to January 2016. Decompressive stented drainage tubes were used in 28 (9.5%) patients. Reconstruction without drainage was applied in 266 (90.5%) cases. In the group of biliobiliary reconstruction drainage was used in 18 out of 89 cases (20.2%), in the group of biliodigestive reconstruction - in 10 out of 202 cases (4.9%). Incidence of specific biliary complications was assessed.

RESULTS

There was significant direct correlation of stented drainage of biliodigestive anastomosis with various biliary complications including bile leakage (r= -0,1253; p=0.06), obturation of anastomosis (r=0.045; p=0.501), stricture of anastomosis (r= -0.0665; p=0.320), other strictures of intrahepatic bile ducts (r= -0.0291; p=0.664), hepatolithiasis (r=0.0857; p=0.199). However significant direct correation was observed between stented drainage and incidence of intrahepatic bile ducts strictures (r=0.2117; p=0.046) and anastomosis obturation (r=0.2330; p=0.028) in case of biliobiliary reconstruction. Significant correation with other biliary complications was absent (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Unconstrained stented drainage during primary biliary reconstruction is associated with increased incidence of biliary complications and should not be indicated routinely. Clear need for drainage should be determined in further investigations.

Living Liver Donors: A Coordinator's Perspective

Living donor liver transplantation is an acceptable alternative for many patients awaiting a liver transplant. The benefits of living donor liver transplantation to the recipient are many; however, there is also an appreciable risk to the donor. Many people, including healthcare professionals, believe that living donor liver transplantation is not ethically justified because any risk to a donor outweighs the benefit to the recipient. Recent studies show adverse events in this population do not include only medical complications; any complication—medical, social, psychological, financial, or other—must be examined to analyze the true incidence of adverse outcomes in living liver donors.

Evaluation of Living Liver Donors

As a result of the cadaveric organ shortage, the number of centers performing living donor liver transplantation has increased. Living donor liver transplantation provides immediate organ availability and avoids the risk of life-threatening complications that occur with long waiting times for cadaveric organs; however, it puts a healthy person at risk for little personal gain. A standardized approach to donor evaluation ensures safety to potential donors. Careful medical (physical examination as well as laboratory and radiological evaluation) and psychological evaluation is imperative to reduce donor complications and ensure good outcomes in recipients. A social worker and psychiatrist assess for mental competency, provide emotional support, and can serve as independent donor advocates. Informed understanding and consent are crucial aspects of the evaluation and include ensuring that the donor understands all potential complications and is free of coercion. Safety of the donor must be the highest priority.

Pathologic Analysis of Right-Lobe Graft Failure in Adult-to-Adult Live Donor Liver Transplantation

Live donor adult liver transplantation (LDALT) utilizing right-lobe grafts is now acceptable as an alternative to cadaveric orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). However, some LDALTs fail and require urgent OLT or result in recipient death. Our aim was to determine the basis of LDALT failure. Liver specimens from 49 LDALT recipients were evaluated and the findings correlated with clinical outcome. Ten patients (20.4%) had either early (< 1 month) or late (> 1 month) graft failure. Eight early failures, 7 of which occurred among our first 25 cases, were due to extensive liver parenchymal necrosis as a result of hepatic artery thrombosis (n=3), portal vein thrombosis (n= 1), hyperperfusion syndrome (n= 1), complete graft thrombosis (n= 1) with Factor V Leiden on a regimen of therapeutic heparin (n=1), sepsis and concomitant graft dysfunction with venous outflow tract injury (n=I), and venous outflow tract thrombosis and parenchymal thermal injury with sepsis (n=1). Preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative severe vessel wall injury was evident in 6/8 early failures. TWo patients had late graft failure, 1 from recurrent hepatitis C and 1 with sepsis/multisystem organ failure. There were no significant differences in graft size, rejection episodes, or operative or ischemic times between patients with and without graft failure. In conclusion, LDALT failed in 10/49 (20%) of our patients, with 8/10 occurring within 1 month post-LDALT owing to vascular/thrombotic complications experienced during the early phase of our institutional experience. Perioperative vessel wall injury appeared to be a major factor in predicting early graft loss.

Small for Size and Flow (SFSF) syndrome: An alternative description for posthepatectomy liver failure

Small for Size Syndrome (SFSS) syndrome is a recognizable clinical syndrome occurring in the presence of a reduced mass of liver, which is insufficient to maintain normal liver function. A definition has yet to be fully clarified, but it is a common clinical syndrome following partial liver transplantation and extended hepatectomy, which is characterized by postoperative liver dysfunction with prolonged cholestasis and coagulopathy, portal hypertension, and ascites. So far, this syndrome has been discussed with focus on the remnant size of the liver after partial liver transplantation or extended hepatectomy. However, the current viewpoints believe that the excessive flow of portal vein for the volume of the liver parenchyma leads to over-pressure, sinusoidal endothelial damages and haemorrhage. The new hypothesis declares that in both extended hepatectomy and partial liver transplantation, progression of Small for Size Syndrome is not determined only by the "size" of the liver graft or remnant, but by the hemodynamic parameters of the hepatic circulation, especially portal vein flow. Therefore, we suggest the term "Small for Size and Flow (SFSF)" for this syndrome. We believe that it is important for liver surgeons to know the pathogenesis and manifestation of this syndrome to react early enough preventing non-reversible tissue damages.

The Incidence of Posthepatectomy Liver Failure Defined by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery among Living Donors

BACKGROUND

Although several publications have reported donor morbidities, deterioration of liver function, which may cause posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), was not assessed specifically.

METHODS

The incidence of PHLF proposed by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS-PHLF) was analyzed among 257 living donors. ISGLS-PHLF was defined by an increased international normalized ratio and hyperbilirubinemia on or after postoperative day 5.

RESULTS

ISGLS-PHLF was identified in 21 donors (8%), of which 18 (85.7%) were grade A, 2 (9.5%) were grade B, and 1 (4.8%) was grade C. The average hospital stay without ISGLS-PHLF was 15 ± 1 days, which extended along with increasing grades (p = 0.03). In univariate analysis, right hepatectomy was significantly associated with the incidence of ISGLS-PHLF (p = 0.02), and right hepatectomy (p = 0.002) and operation time (p = 0.01) in multivariate analysis. Of 176 right lobe donors, 19 (10.8%) developed ISGLS-PHLF, of which 16 (84.2%) were grade A, 2 (10.5%) were grade B, and 1 (5.3%) was grade C. Operation time was significantly associated with the incidence of ISGLS-PHLF in univariate (p = 0.002) and multivariate (p = 0.003) analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Right lobe donation surgery is associated with a higher incidence of ISGLS-PHLF.

Biliary complications in right lobe living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation is an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation in the face of insufficient deceased donor liver grafts. Unfortunately, the incidence of biliary complication after living donor liver transplantation is significantly higher than that after deceased donor liver transplantation using grafts from non-cardiac-death donations. The two most common biliary complications after living donor liver transplantation are bile leakage and biliary anastomotic stricture. Early treatment with endoscopic and interventional radiological approaches can achieve satisfactory outcomes. If treatment with these approaches fails, the salvage measure for prompt rectification will be surgical revision, which is now seldom performed. This paper also discusses risk factors in donor biliary anatomy that can affect recipients.

The role of adult living donor liver transplantation and recent advances

Twenty years since the first cases were described, adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) is now considered a valid option to expand the donor pool in view of the ongoing shortage of organs and the high waiting list mortality rate. Despite the rapid evolution and acceptance of this complex process of donation and transplantation in clinical practice, the indications, outcome, ethical considerations and quality and safety aspects continue to evolve based on new data from large cohort studies. This article reviews the surgical and clinical advances in the field of liver transplantation, focusing on technical refinements and discussing the issues that may lead to a further expansion of this complex surgical procedure and the role of ALDLT.

Reconstructing middle hepatic vein tributaries in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

AIMS

To investigate the effectiveness of our technique and policy in reconstructing middle hepatic vein (MHV) tributaries of patients undergoing right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

From January 2001 to December 2010, 186 adult patients underwent right-lobe LDLT without the MHV. Patients were divided into two groups: group A (n = 71) and group B (n = 115) without or with the MHV tributaries reconstruction. We evaluated the serum liver function markers after transplantation and monitored vascular flow in the graft and interpositional vein by Doppler ultrasonography.

RESULTS

The cumulative 1-, 3-, 5-year graft and patient survival rates were not significant between group A and group B (p = 0.287 and p = 0.258). Biliary complications appeared to be more frequent in group A than in group B (16.9 vs. 5.2%, p = 0.009). Liver function impairment was found in patients without MHV reconstruction and those with occluded interpositional vessels early after transplantation. The cumulative 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month patency rate of the interpositional veins was 81.51, 79.60, 74.69 and 72.68%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The reconstruction technique based on our policy ensures excellent outflow drainage and favorable recipient outcome, while better criteria for MHV reconstruction should be established.

Best practices in the pediatric pretransplant psychosocial evaluation

Assessment of psychosocial functioning is an often-included component of the pretransplant evaluation process. This study reviews several domains of assessment that have been related to post-transplant outcomes across solid organ transplant populations. These include evaluation of patient and family past adherence, knowledge about the transplantation process, and their neurocognitive, psychological, and family functioning. To date, few comprehensive pretransplant evaluation measures have been standardized for use with children; however, several assessment measures used to evaluate the aforementioned domains are reviewed throughout the study. Additionally, this article discusses some developmental, illness-specific, and cultural considerations in conducting the psychosocial evaluation. We also discuss ethical issues specific to the pediatric psychosocial evaluation. Recommendations are advanced to promote a comprehensive evaluation that identifies family strengths and risk factors as they begin the transplant journey.

Live liver donors' risk thresholds: risking a life to save a life

BACKGROUND

There is still some controversy regarding the ethical issues involved in live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and there is uncertainty on the range of perioperative morbidity and mortality risks that donors will consider acceptable.

METHODS

This study analysed donors' inclinations towards LDLT using decision analysis techniques based on the probability trade-off (PTO) method. Adult individuals with an emotional or biological relationship with a patient affected by end-stage liver disease were enrolled. Of 122 potential candidates, 100 were included in this study.

RESULTS

The vast majority of participants (93%) supported LDLT. The most important factor influencing participants' decisions was their wish to improve the recipient's chance of living a longer life. Participants chose to become donors if the recipient was required to wait longer than a mean ± standard deviation (SD) of 6 ± 5 months for a cadaveric graft, if the mean ± SD probability of survival was at least 46 ± 30% at 1 month and at least 36 ± 29% at 1 year, and if the recipient's life could be prolonged for a mean ± SD of at least 11 ± 22 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential donors were risk takers and were willing to donate when given the opportunity. They accepted significant risks, especially if they had a close emotional relationship with the recipient.

Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and open donor right hepatectomy: a prospective case-matched study from china

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted hepatectomy is a new minimally invasive approach for graft harvesting in living donors. Only a few liver transplant centers have introduced this surgical procedure.

METHODS

A prospective case-matched study was conducted on 25 consecutive donors who underwent laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy (LADRH) between July 2011 and March 2013 at our transplant center. These donors were matched 1:1 according to age, gender, and body mass index with 25 donors who underwent open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH).

RESULTS

LADRH was successfully performed in all 25 of the donors. Donor complications, estimated blood loss, and operative time were similar between the groups. Hospital stay and periods of analgesic use were significantly shorter in the LADRH group [7.0 ± 1.4 (LADRH) vs. 8.7 ± 2.4 (ODRH), p = 0.003, and 2.4 ± 1.0 (LADRH) vs. 3.2 ± 1.0 (ODRH), p = 0.011, respectively). The total in-hospital cost is higher with LADRH, primarily due to the additional material costs for LADRH. Finally, there were no differences in graft size, graft survival, or recipient complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that LADRH is a feasible and safe procedure compared with ODRH. Although higher material costs for laparoscopic assisted procedures are inevitable, LADRH may have an advantage over ODRH by causing less pain and facilitating earlier recovery. Efforts can be made to improve the technical success of LADRH for some overweight donors.

Are the imaging findings used to assess the portal triad reliable to perform living-donor liver transplant?

BACKGROUND

A crucial aspect of living-donor liver transplant is the risk imposed to the donor due to a procedure performed in a healthy individual that can lead to a high postoperative morbidity rate

AIM

To correlate the pre- and intraoperative hepatic imaging findings of living adult donors.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2008 the medical charts of 66 donors were revised; in that, 42 were males (64%) and 24 females (36%), mean age of 30 ± 8 years. The preoperative anatomy was analyzed by magnetic resonance cholangiography to study the bile ducts and by computed tomography angiography to evaluate the hepatic artery and portal vein. Normalcy criteria were established according to previously published studies.

RESULTS

Anatomic variations of the bile ducts were found in 59.1% of donors, of the artery hepatic in 31.8% and of the portal vein in 30.3% of the cases during the preoperative period. The magnetic resonance cholangiography findings were in agreement in 44 (66.6%) of donors and in disagreement in 22 (33.3%). With regards to hepatic artery, in all donors the findings of the imaging examination were in agreement with those of the intraoperative period. As to the portal vein, the computed tomography findings were in agreement in 59 (89.4%) donors and in disagreement in seven (10.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The bile duct anatomic variations are frequent, and the magnetic resonance cholangiography showed moderate accuracy (70%) in reproducing the surgical findings; the computed tomography reproduced the intraoperative findings of the hepatic artery in 100% of donors, and of the portal vein in 89.4% of the cases, thus demonstrating high accuracy (89%).

Venous Outflow Reconstruction in Adult Living Donor Liver Transplant: Outcome of a Policy for Right Lobe Grafts without the Middle Hepatic Vein

Introduction. The difficulty and challenge of recovering a right lobe graft without MHV drainage is reconstructing the outflow tract of the hepatic veins. With the inclusion or the reconstruction of the MHV, early graft function is satisfactory. The inclusion of the MHV or not in the donor's right lobectomy should be based on sound criteria to provide adequate functional liver mass for recipient, while keeping risk to donor to the minimum. Objective. Reviewing the results of a policy for right lobe grafts transplant without MHV and analyzing methods of venous reconstruction related to outcome. Materials and Methods. We have two groups Group A (with more than one HV anast.) (n = 16) and Group B (single HV anast.) (n = 24). Both groups were compared regarding indications for reconstruction, complications, and operative details and outcomes, besides describing different modalities used for venous reconstruction. Results. Significant increase in operative details time in Group A. When comparison came to complications and outcomes in terms of laboratory findings and overall hospital stay, there were no significant differences. Three-month and one-year survival were better in Group A. Conclusion. Adult LDLT is safely achieved with better outcome to recipients and donors by recovering the right lobe without MHV, provided that significant MHV tributaries (segments V, VIII more than 5 mm) are reconstructed, and any accessory considerable inferior right hepatic veins (IRHVs) or superficial RHVs are anastomosed.

Early and long-term results of routine microsurgical biliary reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation

We describe our early and long-term experience with routine biliary reconstruction via a microsurgical technique in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). One hundred seventy-seven grafts (including 3 dual grafts) were primarily transplanted into 174 recipients. The minimum follow-up was 44 months. Biliary reconstructions were based on biliary anatomical variations in graft and recipient ducts. The recipient demographics, graft characteristics, types of biliary reconstruction, biliary complications (BCs), and outcomes were evaluated. There were 130 right lobe grafts and 47 left lobe grafts. There were single ducts in 71.8%, 2 ducts in 26.0%, and 3 ducts in 2.3% of the grafts. The complications were not significantly related to the size and number of ducts, the discrepancy between recipient and donor ducts, the recipient age, the ischemia time, or the type of graft. The overall BC rate was 9.6%. The majority of the complications occurred within the first year, and only 1 patient developed a stricture at 20 months. No new complications were noted after 2 years. When the learning-curve phase of the first 15 cases was excluded, the overall BC rate was 6.79%, and the rate of complications requiring interventions was 2.5%. In conclusion, the routine use of microsurgical biliary reconstruction decreases the number of early and long-term anastomotic BCs in LDLT.

[The biliary complications in live donor liver transplant do not affect the long-term results]

INTRODUCTION

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an effective treatment for patients with terminal chronic liver disease, despite the high incidence of biliary complications. The objective is to evaluate the results and long-term impact of biliary complications after THDV.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2000 to 2010, 70 right lobe LDLT were performed. Biliary complications (leakage and stenosis) of the 70 LDLT recipients were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients (55.7%) had some type of biliary complication. Twenty nine presented a leak, and of these, 14 subsequently developed a stricture. In addition, 10 patients had a stenosis without prior leakage. The median time to onset of stenosis was almost a year. Patients with previous biliary leakage were more likely to develop stenosis (58% vs. 29.5% at 5 years, P=.05). With a median follow up of 80 months, 70.8% of patients were successfully treated by interventional radiology. After excluding early mortality, there were no differences in survival according to biliary complications. A decrease of biliary complications was observed in the last 35 patients compared with the first 35.

CONCLUSIONS

LDLT is associated with a high incidence of biliary complications. However, long-term outcome of patients is not affected. After a median follow-up time of nearly seven years, no differences were found in survival according to the presence of biliary complications.

Anaesthesia for Living Related Liver Transplantation

With the greater success of liver transplantation, livers from deceased donors are insufficient to meet the need for livers required for transplantation. In various parts of Asia, living related liver transplantation is the treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease. An overview of anaesthesia for both the donor and the recipient is described. Controversies involving epidural anaesthesia, blood loss prevention and blood conservation techniques in the donor are discussed. Various aspects in the anaesthetic management of the recipient are also looked at.

MRI for evaluation of potential living liver donors: a new approach including contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiography

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility of a comprehensive MRI protocol using intrabiliary contrast medium (gadolinium-EOB-DTPA) for evaluation of living liver donors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective study, 30 donor candidates for living-related liver transplantation (17 men; 13 women, mean age 37 ± 10.9 years) underwent MRI including MR-angiography (MRA) as well as a conventional T2-weighted MR-cholangiography (MRC) and a contrast-enhanced sequence for depiction of the biliary structures. MRC and MRA images were evaluated for quality on a four-point-scale (score of 0 indicated poor and a score of 3, excellent image quality). Anatomic variants of the arterial, venous, portal venous, and biliary structures were identified.

RESULTS

Image quality was diagnostic in all examinations except for 4 of 30 MRA data sets. Intrahepatic biliary structures, especially with regard to the intrahepatic bile ducts of 2nd and 3rd order could be identified with significantly increased image quality than in conventional T2-weighted MRC sequences (P = 0.005 and P = 0.035). A high percentage rate of anatomic variants regarding the biliary, arterial, venous, and portal venous anatomy was found.

CONCLUSION

This protocol allows the evaluation of liver donors especially with regard to the biliary structures. However, the depiction of the arterial anatomy requires further technical developments.

Anatomic similarity of the hepatic artery and portal vein according to the donor-recipient relationship

INTRODUCTION

Anatomic variants of the hepatic vasculature are common, so precise preoperative donor evaluation, including variations in the vasculature, is essential. We analyzed the anatomic similarity according to the donor-recipient relationship.

METHODS

Among the cases who underwent living donor liver transplantations from September 2008 to January 2011 we selected 104 cases with clearly defined hepatic artery and portal vein on preoperative computed tomography. They were classified according to Hiatt et al for the hepatic artery and Cheng for the portal vein. We categorized the 104 cases into three groups: parents-child (n=40), sibling (n=24) and no-relation (n=40), for analysis of the concordance of the hepatic artery and portal vein.

RESULT

Anatomic variations were observed in 25% of donors and 23.1% of recipients in the hepatic artery and 6.7% of donors and 10.6% of recipients in the portal vein. There was no significant difference in the distribution of the type of hepatic vasculature. Identical anatomic variations between donors and recipients were observed in 62.5% of the parent-child; 66.7% of the sibling and 52.5% of no-related group (P=.493) in the hepatic artery and 92.5%, 100%, and 77.5% (P=.014) in the portal vein respectively.

CONCLUSION

There was no similarity in the anatomic variations of the hepatic artery according to the donor-recipient relationship, but a similarity in portal venous anatomy according to the donor-recipient relationship.

Is left lobe adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation ready for widespread use? The US experience (1998-2010)

OBJECTIVES

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an accepted treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease. To minimize risk to the donor, left lobe (LL) LDLT may be an ideal option in adult LDLT.

METHODS

This study assessed the outcomes of LL-LDLT compared with right lobe (RL) LDLT in adults (1998-2010) as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN).

RESULTS

A total of 2844 recipients of LDLT were identified. Of these, 2690 (94.6%) underwent RL-LDLT and 154 (5.4%) underwent LL-LDLT. A recent increase in the number of LL-LDLTs was noted: average numbers of LL-LDLTs per year were 5.2 during 1998-2003 and 19.4 during 2004-2010. Compared with RL-LDLT recipients, LL-LDLT recipients were younger (mean age: 50.5 years vs. 47.0 years), had a lower body mass index (BMI) (mean BMI: 24.5 kg/m(2) vs. 26.8 kg/m(2)), and were more likely to be female (64.6% vs. 41.9%). Donors in LL-LDLT had a higher BMI (mean BMI: 29.4 kg/m(2) vs. 26.5 kg/m(2)) and were less likely to be female (30.9% vs. 48.1%). Recipients of LL-LDLT had a longer mean length of stay (24.9 days vs. 18.2 days) and higher retransplantation rates (20.3% vs. 10.9%). Allograft survival in LL-LDLT was significantly lower than in RL-LDLT and there was a trend towards inferior patient survival. In Cox regression analysis, LL-LDLT was found to be associated with an increased risk for allograft failure [hazard ratio (HR): 2.39)] and inferior patient survival (HR: 1.86).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of LL-LDLTs has increased in recent years.

All-in-one sleeve patch graft venoplasty for multiple hepatic vein reconstruction in living donor liver transplantation

OBJECTIVES

This paper presents an innovative technique to address complex multiple hepatic vein (HV) reconstruction in right lobe graft living donor liver transplantation (RL-LDLT).

METHODS

A patient with hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis underwent RL-LDLT. The graft had seven HVs, including: the right HV (17 mm); one segment VII HV (11 mm); two segment VI HVs (6 mm and 16 mm), and three segment V HVs. The graft weighed 663 g (53% of standard liver volume; ratio of graft weight to recipient body weight: 0.96). Each HV had significant drainage territory requiring reconstruction. A cryopreserved iliac vein graft was used to create a sleeve patch to incorporate the HV openings. The holes were anastomosed to their corresponding HV tributaries using continuous 6-0 polydioxanone (PDS) sutures. Two of the three segment V HVs were combined using a smaller iliac vein patch, which was anastomosed in an end-to-side fashion to a previously harvested recipient umbilical vein interposition graft. The other end of the umbilical vein graft was anastomosed to the larger iliac vein sleeve patch.

RESULTS

Overall, six HV openings were incorporated in one sleeve patch to allow a single wide anastomosis with the recipient inferior vena cava. Doppler ultrasound after reconstruction showed adequate flow patterns in all the HVs.

CONCLUSIONS

All-in-one sleeve patch graft venoplasty simplifies the reconstruction of multiple HVs and reduces warm ischaemia time in RL-LDLT with excellent outcomes.

Reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein tributary in adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

In adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the use of a right lobe graft without the middle hepatic vein (MHV) can cause hepatic congestion and disturbance of venous drainage. To solve this problem, we successfully used cadaveric venous allografts preserved in 4 °C University of Wisconsin (UW) solution within 10 days as interposition veins for drainage of the paramedian portion of the right lobe in adult LDLT.

METHODS

From June 2007 to January 2008, 11 adult LDLT patients received modified right liver grafts. The major MHV tributaries (greater than 5 mm in diameter) of 9 cases were preserved and reconstructed using cadaveric interposition vein allografts that had been stored for 1 to 10 days in 4 °C UW solution. The regeneration of the paramedian sector of the grafts and the patency of the interposition vein allografts were examined by Doppler ultrasonography after the operation.

RESULTS

MHV tributaries were reconstructed in 9 recipients. Only 1 recipient died of renal failure and severe pulmonary infection on day 9 after transplantation without any hemiliver venous outflow obstruction. The other 8 recipients achieved long-term survival with a median follow-up of 30 months. The cumulative patency rates of the 8 recipients were 63.63% (7/11), 45.45% (5/11), 45.45% (5/11) and 36.36% (4/11) at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively. Regeneration of the paramedian sectors was equivalent.

CONCLUSION

The cadaveric venous allograft preserved in 4 °C UW solution within 10 days serves as a useful alternative for interposition veins in facilitating implantation of a right lobe graft and guarantees outflow of the MHV.

Biliary complications after living donor liver transplantation

Biliary complications occur more frequently after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation, and they remain the most common and intractable problems after LDLT. The anatomical limitations of multiple tiny bile ducts and the differential blood supplies of the graft ducts may be significant factors in the pathophysiological mechanisms of biliary complications in patients undergoing LDLT. A clear understanding of the biliary blood supply, the Glissonian sheath, and the hilar plate has contributed to new techniques for preparing bile ducts for anastomosis, and these techniques have resulted in a dramatic drop in the incidence of biliary complications. Most biliary complications after LDLT can be successfully treated with nonsurgical approaches, although the management of multiple biliary anastomoses and nonanastomotic strictures continues to be a challenge.

Living-donor hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Organ transplantation from deceased donors is still far below the need. Because of this deficiency, liver transplantations are performed mostly from live donors in many transplant centers in our country. Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has evolved dramatically over the past decade. The aim of this study was to present our clinical experience with living-donor hepatectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent donor hepatectomy between March 2000 and September 2010. We reviewed demographic data, operation type, operation and cold ischemia times, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

During the study period, 140 living donors underwent operations for liver transplantation. We performed 108 right hepatectomies, 17 left hepatectomies, and 15 left lateral hepatectomies. The mean age of the donors was 30.8 years. There was no operative or postoperative mortality. Overall morbidity rate was 13.57% (n = 19). Nine patients had biliary leakages, 4 biliomas; 2 urinary tract infections, and 1 each inferior vena caval injury, pneumonia, portal vein thrombosis, and acute tubular necrosis. Reoperation was not required in any of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Living-donor liver transplantation is a valuable alternative for patients awaiting a cadaver organ. Live-donor hepatectomy can be performed with low morbidity. The greatest disadvantage of this procedure is the risk of the surgical operation for the individual who will experience no medical benefit from this procedure.

Liver allograft outcomes after laparoscopic-assisted and minimal access live donor hepatectomy for transplantation

BACKGROUND

The critical shortage of deceased organ donors has led to live-donor hepatectomy as an alternative donor option for transplantation. Although laparoscopic hepatectomy has been well described for management of liver tumors and can be performed safely, few studies have examined early recipient allograft outcomes after laparoscopic live-donor hepatectomy. We describe our initial experience with laparoscopic-assisted and minimal-access donor hepatectomy and its potential as a safe alternative with graft function comparable with open resection in live-donor liver transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of our past 30 successive live-donor transplants between 2005 and 2009. Fifteen allografts were procured by standard open live-donor (OLD) hepatectomy, and 15 by laparoscopic-assisted (LALD) or minimal-access (MA) live-donor hepatectomy. Left lateral segment grafts were subcategorized and analyzed further.

RESULTS

Mean donor age, sex, and liver anatomy were comparable between donor groups. Early graft function as measured by peak total bilirubin level, aspartate aminotransferase level, alanine aminotransferase level, and international normalized ratio on postoperative days 2, 7, 30, and 90 were similar between groups, although the international normalized ratio was slightly more increased on postoperative day 7 in LALD grafts (1.75 ± .45 vs 1.28 ± .16; P = .02). Perioperative allograft biliary (2 of 15 vs 0 of 15; P = .48) and vascular (3 of 15 vs 1 of 15; P = .6) complication rates also were comparable between OLD and LALD/MA grafts. One-year graft and patient survival for LALD/MA was 100% compared with 93% for OLD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience shows that LALD or MA live-donor hepatectomy is a safe procedure and produces early graft function comparable with standard OLD hepatectomy. Multicenter, larger-volume experience will determine the widespread application of this technique.

Comparison between postprocessing techniques in the analysis of hepatic arteries using multi-detector-row computed tomography angiography

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to compare 4 different postprocessing techniques (maximum-intensity projection [MIP], multiplanar reconstruction, curved planar reconstruction, and volume rendering [VR]) for the study of hepatic arteries.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-seven patients who underwent multi-detector-row computed tomography angiography between August 2009 and January 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. For each patient and for each reconstruction method, the image quality was evaluated and the interobserver and intraobserver agreement was calculated according to Cohen statistics.

RESULTS

The Pearson r between the observers for the common hepatic artery measurement (Hounsfield unit) was good (r = 0.88). The VR showed a Cohen κ value of 0.78, and the highest image-quality score was obtained using MIP (total value, 384; mean value, 3.01) for observer 1 and using VR and MIP for observer 2 (mean value of 2.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Maximum-intensity projection and VR showed the optimal interobserver and intraobserver agreement and the highest quality scores and therefore should be used as postprocessing techniques when analyzing the hepatic arteries.

Comparison of biliary complications in adult living-donor liver transplants performed at two busy transplant centers

Adult living-donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) has a high rate of biliary complications. We identified risk factors that correlate with biliary leaks and strictures by combining data from two centers. Records of ALDLT right lobe recipients (n = 156) at two centers between December 1998 and February 2005 were reviewed. Leak rate was analyzed in 144 recipients after we excluded those with hepatic artery thrombosis or death within 30 d of transplant. Stricture rate was also analyzed in 132 recipients after we excluded those with graft survival or follow-up <180 d. Biliary reconstructions were performed using either duct-to-duct (DD) or Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy and were subclassified by anatomic type, number of anastomoses performed, and stent use. Prevalence of a leak and/or a stricture was 39%; 11% of recipients developed both. Single DD anastomoses between the graft right hepatic duct to the recipient common duct had significantly lower incidence of leaks compared to all other anastomotic types. Early leak was predictive of late stricture development (p = 0.006), but recipient demographics, diagnosis, warm ischemia time, anastomosis type, duct number, year of transplant, stent use, and transplant center were not. The results suggest donors with a single right hepatic duct reconstructed to the recipient common bile duct are the most likely to avoid biliary problems after ALDLT.