Low-dose heparin therapy during living donor right hepatectomy is associated with few side effects and does not increase vascular thrombosis in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2013;45:222-224. [PMID: 23375304 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.02.043]

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in the Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Hemihepatectomy

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing hemihepatectomy.

METHODS

From January 2017 to June 2019, 54 and 56 patients were enrolled into the control and ERAS group, retrospectively. All the indicators related to operation, liver functions, and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis identified 72 patients for further analysis.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics were well-matched after PSM, and there were no significant differences in the operative duration, blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital costs, and most postoperative indicators in these 2 groups. In the ERAS group, D-dimer and fibrin degradation product values were significantly reduced (3.57 (2.874.60) μg/ml vs 4.81 (3.948.29) μg/ml and 11.90 (10.0418.02) μg/ml vs 15.80 (11.5529.24) μg/ml; P = .002 and P = .023, respectively). The days that semiliquid diet was allowed after surgery (2.00 (2.003.00) days vs 5.00 (4.006.00) days, P < .001), abdominal drainage tube indwelling duration (5.00 (4.005.00) days vs 5.00 (4.756.25) days, P = .004), and hospital stay after surgery (6.00 (6.007.00) days vs 8.00 (7.0010.00) days, P < .001) were also significantly shorter. The proportion of patients requiring analgesic treatment was significantly lower in the postoperative day 2 and day 4 (P < .001 and P = .025, respectively). The morbidity was significantly less (36.11% vs 69.44%, P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS programs are feasible and safe in HCC patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Postoperative anticoagulant therapy may be one of the necessary steps.

Safety and Efficacy of Living Donor Hepatectomy Without Systemic Heparinization: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

There is no consensus regarding the use of systemic heparin, and long-term outcomes of living donor hepatectomy (LDH) without systemic heparinization have not yet been determined. This study was performed to determine whether systemic heparinization can be omitted during LDH, with a focus on donor safety and long-term outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of 175 cases of LDH performed in our institution between January 2011 and December 2014: group I (n = 79) received systemic heparinization, whereas group II (n = 96) did not, but liver graft was flushed with a heparinized perfusate. Postoperative bleeding requiring blood transfusion or intervention was more frequent in group I than in group II (P = .028). The decreases in donor hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, and platelet count during the early postoperative period, were greater in group I than in group II. In multivariate analysis, systemic heparin was the only independent risk factor for blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR] = 5.114; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.201-21.775; P = .027) and significant postoperative bleeding (OR = 7.731; 95% CI: 1.345-44.429; P = .022) after LDH. Most postoperative complications including graft vascular thrombosis were similar between the 2 groups, as was the survival rate, and neither graft loss due to vascular thrombosis nor non-anastomotic biliary stricture was evident. In conclusion, omission of systemic heparinization during LDH is a feasible and safe option without adverse effects.

Pulmonary Embolism During Hepatoblastoma Resection

Although hepatoblastoma is rare, it is the most malignant tumour of childhood. Treatment is usually done by surgical resection and chemotherapy. The mortality and morbidity have decreased due to improvements in the treatments. In this process, hepatic resection has a risk of pulmonary embolism, and this condition could be fatal. In this case, a 9-month-old patient who was treated with chemotherapy and then underwent hepatectomy was presented. We used non-invasive methods such as the perfusion index (PI), the plethysmographic variability index (PVI) (Massimo Radical 7) and non-invasive total haemoglobin measurement (SpHb) rather than invasive measurements. During closure of the surgical skin incision, the end-tidal CO₂ (ETCO₂) value dropped, after which arrhythmia and bradycardia resulted in cardiac arrest. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was initiated. However, the patient did not respond to CPR. We concluded that heparin may be administered to reduce the risk of thrombosis in patients undergoing liver surgery.

Right hepatectomy in living donors with previous abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the impact of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) on living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH). The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of liver transplantation using right lobe grafts of living donors with PAS.

METHODS

Data were reviewed from LDRH patients at the authors' institution between March 2008 and November 2014. LDRH patients with PAS were divided into two groups according to upper PAS (group 1) or lower PAS (group 2), and they were compared to those without PAS (group 3) who were matched 1:1 based on age, gender, and body mass index. Perioperative data, complications by the Clavien classification, and the outcomes with more than 14 months follow-up were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-three (4.9%) of a total of 471 LDRH donors had PAS. Eleven donors were assigned to group 1, 12 to group 2, and 23 to group 3. Intraperitoneal adhesions were found in 20 (87.0%) of 23 donors with PAS, of whom 5 (21.7%) had adhesiolysis-related injuries that happened more commonly in group 1 than in group 2 (P=0.025). LDRH was successfully completed under upper midline laparotomy in all donors. No donors received perioperative blood transfusion. The peak postoperative AST, ALT, INR, and total bilirubin levels made no difference between the three groups. Compared with group 3, groups 1 and 2 had a longer operative time (P=0.012) and a higher grade I complication rate (P=0.047). All donors recovered fully to their routine activities. The 23 recipients of grafts from donors with PAS showed good liver function with 1-year graft and patient survivals of 100%.

CONCLUSION

A history of PAS is not a contraindication to LDRH in the current era of advanced surgical techniques.

The Impact of a Surgical Protocol for Enhanced Recovery on Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Single-Center Cohort Study

The concept of surgery for enhanced recovery (SFER) program has never been an issue in the context of living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH), much less its effects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes after the establishment of an SFER protocol for LDRH in a single center.A single-center cohort study was performed in 500 consecutive living donors who underwent right hepatectomy from January 2005 to June 2014 by analyzing the outcomes before and after an established SFER protocol that evolved with continuous refinements in surgical technique and management over 300 LDRHs, being in place on September 2011. Donor characteristics, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications divided into 2 groups (group 1, stepwise adjustment; group 2, complete adherence to the protocol) were compared.Donor characteristics were comparable in the 2 groups. Overall complication rate was 10.0% with no mortality. In group 2, operative time, hospital stay, and overall complication rate decreased significantly, and the morbidity was 1% and confined in grade I complication without reoperation, perioperative blood transfusion, or readmission. All donors in this series recovered fully and returned to the previous functional lifestyle.An SFER protocol on LDRH can be established by the gradual implementation of various refinements of surgical technique, and the recent outcomes achieved after the establishment of an SFER protocol could provide a current guidance on LDRH toward the ultimate goal of zero morbidity.

Is Systemic heparinization necessary during living donor hepatectomy?

Systemic heparinization has traditionally been performed during living donor hepatectomy (LDH) at most transplant centers because of the possibility of graft vascular thrombosis. However, no consensus on the use of systemic heparinization during LDH has yet emerged. The aims of the present study were to compare donor and recipient outcomes with reference to systemic heparinization and to determine whether or not systemic heparin needs to be administered to living donors. Via a retrospective review, we analyzed the outcomes of 137 LDHs performed at our institution from January 2011 to October 2013; 79 donors received systemic heparinization (group I), whereas 58 did not, but the liver graft was flushed with a heparinized perfusate (group II). Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, laboratory data, postoperative complications, and survival rates were compared between the 2 groups. The overall complication rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups, but postoperative bleeding requiring red blood cell transfusions occurred more frequently in group I versus group II (7.6% versus 0.0%, P = 0.03). The incidences of graft vascular thrombosis were similar in the 2 groups, and no graft loss caused by vascular thrombosis was evident during the early postoperative period. Moreover, no difference in either posttransplant graft function or survival was apparent between the 2 groups. The rates of decreases in donor hemoglobin, hematocrit, and platelet count levels during the early postoperative period were significantly higher in group I versus group II. In conclusion, the omission of systemic heparinization during LDH is both feasible and safe, with no adverse effects on donor or recipient outcomes.

Fibrinolysis after reperfusion of liver graft

From September 2012 to March 2013, a total of 63 adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantations were performed at our institution. All the patients were monitored for their coagulation functions using rotation thromboelastometry (ROTEM, Tem Innovations GmbH) during the procedure at the following points: preoperative baseline, 5 minutes, 30 minutes, and 120 minutes, respectively, after reperfusion of the liver graft. A total of 84.13% of cases (n = 53) revealed fibrinolysis after reperfusion of the graft and the condition was reversed after 30 minutes without any need for additional treatment. No significant coagulopathy was observed during this period in all of the cases. The result of the ROTEM finding must correlate with the clinical situation before instituting any management to avoid the risk of thrombosis of the hepatic artery.

Pushing the frontiers of living donor right hepatectomy

Living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) is currently the most common donor surgery in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation although the morbidity and mortality reported in living donors still contradicts the Hippocratic tenet of “do no harm”. Achieving low complication rates in LDRH remains a matter of major concern. Living donor surgery is performed worldwide as an established solution to the donor shortage. The aim of this study was to assess the current status of LDRH and comment on the future of the procedure; assessment was made from the standpoint of optimizing the donor selection criteria and reducing morbidity based on both the authors’ 8-year institutional experience and a literature review. New possibilities have been explored regarding selection criteria. The safety of living donors with unfavorable conditions, such as low remnant liver volume, fatty change, or old age, should also be considered. Abdominal incisions have become shorter, even without laparoscopic assistance; upper midline laparotomy is the primary incision used in more than 400 consecutive LDRHs in the authors’ institution. Various surgical techniques based on preoperative imaging technology of vascular and biliary anomalies have decreased the anatomical barriers in LDRH. Operative time has been reduced, with low blood loss. Laparoscopic or robotic LDRH has been tried in only a few selected donors. The LDRH-specific, long-term outcomes remain to be addressed. The follow-up duration of these studies should be long enough to address possible late complications. Donor safety, which is the highest priority, is ensured by three factors: preoperative selection, intraoperative surgical technique, and postoperative management. These three focus areas should be continuously refined, with the ultimate goal of zero morbidity.