Small Upper Midline Incision for Living Donor Hemi-Liver Graft Procurement in Adults

Minimizing Incision in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Initial Experience and Comparative Analysis of Upper Midline Incision in 115 Recipients

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) needs "Mercedes Benz" or "J-shaped" incision, causing short and long-term complications. An upper midline incision (UMI) is less invasive alternative but technically challenging. Reporting UMI for recipients in LDLT vs. conventional J-shaped incision. Retrospective analysis, July 2021 to December 2022. Peri-operative details and post-transplant outcomes of 115 consecutive adult LDLT recipients transplanted with UMI compared with 140 recipients with J-shaped incision. Cohorts had similar preoperative and intraoperative variables. The UMI group had significant shorter time to ambulation (3 ± 1.6 vs. 3.6 ± 1.3 days, p = 0.001), ICU stay (3.8 ± 1.3 vs. 4.4 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.001), but a similar hospital stay (15.6±7.6 vs. 16.1±10.9 days, p = 0.677), lower incidence of pleural effusion (11.3% vs. 27.1% p = 0.002), and post-operative ileus (1.7% vs. 9.3% p = 0.011). The rates of graft dysfunction (4.3% vs. 8.5% p = 0.412), biliary complications (6.1% vs. 12.1% p = 0.099), 90-day mortality (7.8% vs. 12.1% p = 0.598) were similar. UMI-LDLT afforded benefits such as reduced pleuropulmonary complications, better early post-operative recovery and reduction in scar-related complaints in the medium-term. This is a safe, non-inferior and reproducible technique for LDLT.

Standardized upfront Glissonean approach and liver hanging maneuver reduces bile leakage from the hepatic hilum in living donors

Biliary complications after hepatectomy in living donors have yet to be eradicated. We hypothesized that a standardized upfront Glissonean approach and liver hanging maneuver (GH) would prevent mechanical and thermal injuries to the hilar plate of the remnant liver by determining the point of bile duct division and the final destination of hepatectomy preceding liver parenchymal transection (safety) and facilitate liver transection deep within the parenchyma and allow maximum length of hilar structures (rationality). GH was implemented in 2016 and its incidence of bile leakage was retrospectively compared against the conventional technique. GH comprises six steps: (1) development of the retrohepatic avascular plane between the right hepatic vein (RHV) and the middle hepatic vein (MHV) and isolation of the hepatic vein(s); (2) isolation of the right or left Glissonean pedicle with the corresponding Glissonean pedicles of the caudate lobe; (3) for right liver grafts and left liver grafts with the caudate lobe, passage of the tape for the liver hanging maneuver along the retrohepatic avascular plane and above the hilar plate, and for left liver grafts without the caudate lobe and for left lateral section grafts, passage of the tape from between the RHV and the MHV, along the Arantius ligament, and to the right of the umbilical portion; (4) liver transection; (5) isolation of hilar structures; and (6) graft procurement. Until 2020, 62 consecutive living donors underwent GH (success rate, 100%). The incidence of bile leakage from the hepatic hilum (0%) was significantly lower than that among 59 donors who underwent the conventional technique in 2011-2015 (9%; p = 0.01). In conclusion, GH is highly effective in reducing bile leakage from the hepatic hilum in living donors.

Caution for living donor liver transplantation with congenital portosystemic shunt: a case report

Background

Congenital portosystemic shunt is an infrequent abnormal connection between the portal vascular system and the systemic circulation. Portosystemic shunts are common findings in patients with cirrhosis, causing gastroesophageal varices, hepatic encephalopathy, and others. However, there is no consensus or literature describing how to manage asymptomatic patients with portosystemic shunts and normal liver.

Case presentation

The patient was a 39-year-old female who underwent donor right hepatectomy for living donor liver transplantation. The patient was healthy by nature, however, developed hepatic encephalopathy after the surgery due to a development of portosystemic shunt. Portosystemic shunt stole portal blood flow, and imaging modalities revealed narrowing of the portal trunk, representing prolonged depletion of portal blood flow. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (B-RTO) was performed for occlusion of the portosystemic shunt. B-RTO increased portal blood flow, and hepatic encephalopathy with hyperammonemia was successfully resolved without the outbreak of any other symptom of portal hypertension.

Conclusions

A congenital portosystemic shunt itself is not a contraindication for donor hepatectomy, but perioperative endovascular shunts occlusion or intraoperative ligature of these shunts should be considered.

Current Status of Surgical Incisions Used in Donors During Living Related Liver Transplantation-A Nationwide Survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

Smaller surgical incisions have recently been introduced in living donor liver procurement. This study used national data from Japan to clarify the present status of surgical incisions in living donor liver procurement.

METHODS

A nationwide, questionnaire-based survey related to 3121 donors and recipients was used. Donors were divided into 2 groups: left lateral segment graft (LLSG) procurement (n = 690) and other types (n = 2431). Incisions were classified into 6 types: type I, upper midline and bilateral subcostal; type II, upper midline and right subcostal; type III, upper midline and right subcostal to the right lateral margin of the abdominal rectus muscle; type IV, upper midline without laparoscopy; type V, upper midline with laparoscopy; and type VI, lower abdominal using the full laparoscopic technique. Types I, II, and III were regarded as standard, and types IV, V, and VI as small incisions.

RESULTS

In LLSGs, blood transfusion and postoperative complication rates were significantly less frequent in the small incision group than in the standard group. In other graft types, there were no significant differences in blood transfusion, postoperative complication, and recipients' graft loss rates. The rates of wound extension during surgery were 2.8% and 2.1% in the small incision group in LLSGs and in other graft types, respectively. A small incision was adapted more frequently and postoperative complications were less common in high-volume centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Various incisions have been adopted in living donor liver procurement. Donor safety and graft integrity appear to have been retained for donors receiving small incisions.

The changes in treatment strategies in ABOi living donor liver transplantation for acute liver failure

INTRODUCTION

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using ABO-incompatible (ABOi) graft for acute liver failure (ALF) is a developing treatment modality.

METHODS

We reviewed the changes in our treatment strategies in applying ABOi LDLT for FH over our fourteen years of experience.

RESULTS

Five patients with ALF received LDLT in adults using ABOi grafts, with different but gradually renewed protocols. The etiologies for acute liver failure included autoimmune hepatitis (n=3) and unknown (n=2). The desensitization protocol for ABOi barrier included Case #1; local infusion (portal vein)+plasma exchange (PE), Case #2; local infusion (hepatic artery)+rituximab+PE, Case #3 and #4; rituximab+PE, and Case #5; rituximab+PE under high-flow continuous hemodiafiltration. Local infusion was abandoned since Case #3, because Case #1 had portal vein thrombosis resulting in graft necrosis and Case #2 had hepatic artery dissection. The patients (Case #2 and #3), who received rituximab within 7 days before LDLT, experienced antibody-mediated rejection. Thus, the most recent protocol for ABOi-LDLT is that rituximab is given 2 weeks before LDLT, followed by high-flow continuous hemodiafiltration to obstacle hepatic encephalopathy until LDLT. The four patients except Case #1 are doing well with good graft function over 3.8±3.7 years.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab-based ABOi-LDLT, most-recently under high-flow hemodiafiltration for treating encephalopathy, is a feasible option for applying LDLT for ALF.

Left lobe living donor liver transplantation in adults: What is the safety limit?

Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) is the most significant cause of graft loss after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), especially after left lobe (LL) LDLT in adults. The safety limit of applying LL-LDLT in adults without severe SFSS with a high rate of lethality needs to be determined. A total of 207 LL-LDLTs in adults since September 2005 were evaluated to analyze the risk factors for severe SFSS, defined as a serum total bilirubin concentration of ≥20.0 mg/dL after LDLT. Although there were no significant differences in cumulative graft survival after LDLT between medium grafts (graft volume [GV] to standard liver volume [SLV] ratio ≥ 40.0%), small grafts (35.0% ≤ GV/SLV < 40.0%), and extra small grafts (GV/SLV < 35.0%), patients with severe SFSS showed a significantly lower 5-year graft survival rate than those without (42.9% versus 94.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis for severe SFSS after LL-LDLT showed that donor age of ≥48 years (P = 0.01), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of ≥ 19 (P < 0.01), and end portal venous pressure of ≥19 mm Hg (P = 0.04) were the significant and independent factors for severe SFSS after LL-LDLT. Within such high-risk subgroups of patients with a donor age of ≥48 years or MELD score of ≥ 19 before LDLT, operative blood loss volume of ≥8.0 L was a risk factor for severe SFSS. LL-LDLT in adults could be indicated and provide acceptable outcomes for the combinations of donors aged < 48 years and recipients with a MELD score of <19. Smaller grafts might yield acceptable outcomes in appropriately selected donor-recipient combinations. Liver Transplantation 22 1666-1675 2016 AASLD.

The learning curves in living donor hemiliver graft procurement using small upper midline incision

The learning curve for performing living donor hemiliver procurement (LDHP) via small upper midline incision (UMI) has not been determined. Living donors (n=101) who underwent LDHP via UMI were included to investigate the learning curve using cumulative sum analysis. The cumulative sum analysis showed that nine cases for right lobe (case #23) and 19 cases for left lobe (case #32 in the whole series) are needed for stable and acceptable surgical outcomes in LDHP via UMI. The established phase (n=69, since case #33) had a significantly shorter operative time, a smaller incision size, and less blood loss than the previous learning phase (n=32, serial case number up to the last 19th left lobe case). Multivariate analysis showed that the learning phase, high body mass index ≥25 kg/m² , and left lobe graft procurement are the factors associated with surgical events including operative blood loss ≥400 mL, operative time ≥300 minutes, or surgical complications ≥Clavien-Dindo grade II. There is an obvious learning curve in performing LDHP via UMI, and 32 cases including both 19 cases for left lobe and nine cases for right lobe are needed for having stable and acceptable surgical outcomes.

Feasible usage of ABO incompatible grafts in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The use of ABO incompatible (ABOi) graft in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has not been an established procedure worldwide.

METHODS

Four hundred and eight adult LDLTs, using ABOi (n=19) and non-ABOi (n=389) grafts, were performed as a single center experience.

RESULTS

In ABOi-LDLT group (n=19), median isoagglutinin titer before plasma exchange (PE) at LDLT and after LDLT (max) was ×256, ×32 and ×32, respectively. Rituximab was given at 21.8±6.1 days before LDLT and PE was performed 3.7±1.6 times. Although ABOi-LDLTs had increased rate of splenectomy (89.4% vs. 44.7%, P<0.001) and lower portal venous pressure (PVP) at the end of surgery (13.8±1.1 vs. 16.9±0.2 mmHg, P=0.003), other operative factors including graft ischemic time, operative time and blood loss were not different between the groups. Although ABOi-LDLTs had increased incidence of cytomegalovirus infection (52.6% vs. 22.9%, P=0.007), other post-transplant complications including bacterial sepsis and acute rejection were not different between the groups. The 5-year graft survival rate was 87.9% in ABOi-LDLTs and 80.3% in non-ABOi-LDLTs (P=0.373).

CONCLUSIONS

ABOi-LDLT could be safely performed, especially under rituximab-based protocol.

Telaprevir versus simeprevir for the treatment of recurrent hepatitis C after living donor liver transplantation

AIM

Our aim was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of telaprevir (TVR)- or simeprevir (SMV)-based triple therapy for recurrent hepatitis C after living donor liver transplantation.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients received antiviral therapy, consisting of either TVR (n = 12) or SMV (n = 14) in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin, plus cyclosporin.

RESULTS

More patients had a dose reduction of the direct-acting agent (36.3% vs 0.0%, P = 0.02) or required blood transfusion for anemia (58.3% vs 7.1%, P < 0.01) in the TVR group. The cyclosporin trough/dose ratio increased significantly from week 0 to week 4 in the TVR group (1.6 ± 0.4 to 5.1 ± 2.0, P < 0.01), but not in the SMV group (1.2 ± 0.3 to 1.3 ± 0.2, P = 0.68). The 24-week cumulative viral clearance rate was 91.7% and 85.7% in the TVR and in SMV groups, respectively. The early viral response and sustained viral response rates were 91.7% and 83.3%, respectively, in the TVR group, compared with 85.7% and 64.3%, respectively, in the SMV group. Interferon-mediated graft dysfunction occurred in four and five patients in the TVR and SMV groups, respectively; two patients were treated by oral steroids, five by steroid pulse and two by thymoglobulin, resulting in viral breakthrough in one case.

CONCLUSION

SMV-based triple therapy was associated with fewer adverse events and drug interactions with cyclosporin, and possibly less antiviral properties to TVR. Interferon-mediated graft dysfunction is a significant clinical problem that warrants particular caution following living donor liver transplantation.

Surgical results for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after curative hepatectomy: Repeat hepatectomy versus salvage living donor liver transplantation

The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of repeat hepatectomy (Hx) and salvage living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A retrospective cohort study was performed to analyze the surgical results of repeat Hx and salvage LDLT for patients with recurrent HCC within the Milan criteria from 1989 to 2012. A total of 159 patients were divided into 2 groups: a repeat Hx group (n = 146) and a salvage LDLT group (n = 13). Operative results and patient prognoses were compared between the 2 groups. The operative invasiveness, including the operation time (229.1 ± 97.7 versus 862.9 ± 194.4 minutes; P < 0.0001) and blood loss (596.3 ± 764.9 versus 24,690 ± 59,014.4 g; P < 0.0001), were significantly higher in the salvage LDLT group. The early surgical results, such as morbidity (31% versus 62%; P = 0.0111) and the duration of hospital stay (20 ± 22 versus 35 ± 21 days; P = 0.0180), were significantly worse in the salvage LDLT group. There was no significant difference in the overall survival (OS) rate, but the disease-free survival rate of the salvage LDLT group was significantly better (P = 0.0002). The OS rate of patients with grade B liver damage in the repeat Hx group was significantly worse (P < 0.0001), and the 5-year OS rate was quite low, that is, 20% (liver damage A, 77% for the repeat Hx group and 75% for the salvage LDLT group). The prognosis of patients with grade B liver damage after repeat Hx for recurrent HCC is poor, and salvage LDLT would be a potent option for such patients.