One hundred nine living donor liver transplants in adults and children: a single-center experience

Implementing living-donor pediatric liver transplantation in Southern Vietnam: 15-year results and perspectives

BACKGROUND

ND2 in Ho Chi Minh City is currently the only public center that performs PLT in Southern Vietnam. In 2005, the first PLT was successfully performed, with support from Belgian experts. This study reviews the implementation of PLT at our center and evaluates the results and challenges.

METHODS

Implementation of PLT at ND2 required medico-surgical team building and extensive improvement of hospital facilities. Records of 13 transplant recipients from 2005 to 2020 were studied retrospectively. Short- and long-term complications, as well as the survival rates, were reported.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 8.3 ± 5.7 years. Surgical complications included one case of hepatic artery thrombosis that was successfully repaired, one case of colon perforation resulting in death from sepsis, and two cases of bile leak that were drained surgically. PTLD was observed in five patients, of whom three died. There were no cases of retransplantation. The 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year patient survival rates were 84.6%, 69.2%, and 69.2%, respectively. There were no cases of complication or death among the donors.

CONCLUSION

Living-donor PLT was developed at ND2 for providing a life-saving treatment to children with end-stage liver disease. Early surgical complication rate was low, and the patient survival rate was satisfactory at 1 year. Long-term survival decreased considerably due to PTLD. Future challenges include surgical autonomy and improvement of long-term medical follow-up with a particular emphasis on prevention and management of Epstein-Barr virus-related disease.

Selection of Safe Donors for Living Donor Liver Transplant Using Extended Right Lobe Graft

Extended right lobectomy (ERL) for living donor liver transplant (LDLT) is selectively performed in many transplant centers and has shown excellent recipient outcomes as reported in previous studies. Yet, there is no universally accepted indication for ERL in respect to donor safety. Current study was designed to stratify risk factors of adverse donor outcome after ERL. A total of 79 living donors who underwent ERL for LDLT were included in analysis. Donors were classified as safety and hazard donor groups according to postoperative findings relevant to posthepatectomy liver failure classification by the International Study Group for Liver Surgery. On multivariable analysis, left lateral section volume <20% of total liver volume and nonpreservation of segment 4a venous drainage were the independent risk factors impairing postoperative outcomes. Despite the short-term impairment of liver function in hazard donor groups, all donors recovered and showed satisfactory remnant liver regeneration. However, these findings have implications in establishing selection criteria of donors eligible for ERL donation. In conclusion, LDLT using ERL graft can be safely performed provided so that left lateral section volume/total donor liver is ≥20% besides conventional donor selection criteria. Also, efforts to preserve segment 4a vein must be made in performing ERL graft procurement in LDLT donors.

Gene therapy for Fabry disease: Progress, challenges, and outlooks on gene-editing

Gene therapy is the delivery of a therapeutic gene for endogenous cellular expression with the goal of rescuing a disease phenotype. It has been used to treat an increasing number of human diseases with many strategies proving safe and efficacious in clinical trials. Gene delivery may be viral or non-viral, performed in vivo or ex vivo, and relies on gene integration or transient expression; all of these techniques have been applied to the treatment of Fabry disease. Fabry disease is a genetic disorder of the α-galactosidase A gene, GLA, that causes an accumulation of glycosphingolipids in cells leading to cardiac, renal and cerebrovascular damage and eventually death. Currently, there are no curative treatments available, and the therapies that are used have significant drawbacks. These treatment concerns have led to the advent of gene therapies for Fabry disease. The first Fabry patients to receive gene therapy were treated with recombinant lentivirus targeting their hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Adeno-associated virus treatments have also begun. Alternatively, the field of gene-editing is a new and rapidly growing field. Gene-editing has been used to repair disease-causing mutations or insert genes into cellular DNA. These techniques have the potential to be applied to the treatment of Fabry disease provided the concerns of gene-editing technology, such as safety and efficiency, were addressed. This review focuses on the current state of gene therapy as it is being developed for Fabry disease, including progresses and challenges as well as an overview of gene-editing and how it may be applied to correct Fabry disease-causing mutations in the future.

A Novel Method for the Prevention and Treatment of Small-for-Size Syndrome in Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Currently there is no consensus on the optimal management of small-for-size syndrome following liver transplantation. Here we describe a technique to alleviate portal hypertension and improve the hepatocyte reperfusion in small-for-size liver transplantation in a Lewis rat model.

METHODS

The rats underwent trans-portal vein intra-hepatic portosystemic shunt using a self-developed porous conical tube (TPIPSS: Fig. 1) on small-for-size liver transplants (SFS) with right lobe graft. The treatment effect was evaluated by comparing hemodynamic parameters, morphological changes, serum parameters, ET-1 and eNOS expression, hepatocyte proliferation and apoptosis, CYP3A2 levels, postoperative complications, and survival between the two groups with SFS liver transplants.

RESULTS

Porous conical prosthesis prolonged the filling time of small-for-size grafts. Moreover, grafts with TPIPSS showed a lower portal vein pressure, improved microcirculatory flow, alleviated histological changes, decreased ET-1 and increased eNOS expressions, and significantly less damage to liver function comparing to grafts without TPIPSS. Mean survival and overall 30-day survival were significantly higher in the TPIPSS group.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that porous conical tube as trans-portal vein intra-hepatic portosystemic shunt device is an effective way to alleviate portal vein hypertension and improve hepatocyte reperfusion after small-for-size liver transplantation.

The Analysis of Posthepatectomy Liver Failure Incidence and Risk Factors Among Right Liver Living Donors According to International Study Group of Liver Surgery Definition

AIM

There is a well-known risk of the emergence of hepatic failure in living donor transplant cases on whom are performed a right donor hepatectomy (RDH). There are different prevalence ratios in literature on this phenomenon. In our study, we aim to depict the prevalence of hepatic failure and risk factors in our cases regarding the most recent description criteria related to hepatic failure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included right liver donor hepatectomy cases who fit the donor evaluation algorithm at the Dokuz Eylul University Liver Transplantation Unit between the period of June 2000 and September 2017. The patients were evaluated regarding preoperative data. Liver failure was defined according to the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS) criteria. We also included statistical analysis of risk factors that are potentially related to liver failure.

RESULTS

We included a total of 276 patients. In 27 (9.7%) patients, we observed posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). In 26 (9.4%) patients, we observed Grade A liver failure; in 1 (0.3%) patient, we observed Grade B liver failure. We did not observe any Grade C hepatic failure. In patients with hepatic failure, we observed a significantly longer period of hospitalization (P = .007). Old age (odds ratio = 1.065, 95% confidence interval, 1.135-29.108, P = .035) and preoperatory red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (odds ratio = 5.749, 95% confidence interval, 1.019-1.113, P = .005) were shown as independent risk factors for PHLF.

CONCLUSION

Posthepatectomy liver failure is a vital complication of RDH. The risk can be decreased by careful selection of donor candidates. Elderly donor candidates and intraoperative RBC are independent risk factors for PHLF.

Fighting Mortality in the Waiting List: Liver Transplantation in North America, Europe, and Asia

Liver disease is a major cause of mortality worldwide. Liver transplantation (LT) is the most effective treatment for end stage liver disease. Available resources and social circumstances have led to different ways of implementing LT around the world. The experience with pediatric LT corroborates the hypothesis that a combination of surgical strategies can be beneficial. The goal of this manuscript is to describe the strategies used by LT centers in North America, Europe and Asia and how these strategies can be applied to reduce waitlist mortality and increase access to LT.

The International Liver Transplantation Society Living Donor Liver Transplant Recipient Guideline

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been increasingly embraced around the world as an important strategy to address the shortage of deceased donor livers. The aim of this guideline, approved by the International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS), is to provide a collection of expert opinions, consensus, and best practices surrounding LDLT. Recommendations were developed from an analysis of the National Library of Medicine living donor transplantation indexed literature using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Writing was guided by the ILTS Policy on the Development and Use of Practice Guidelines (www.ilts.org). Intended for use by physicians, these recommendations support specific approaches to the diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventive aspects of care of living donor liver transplant recipients.

Compared to cadaveric liver transplantation, live donor LT (LDLT) is challenged by ethical, medical and surgical considerations, many of which are still unresolved. The aim of this guideline is to provide a collection of expert opinions, consensus, and best practices surrounding LDLT.

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.

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.

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.

Living donor liver transplantation in the USA

Living donor liver transplant (LDLT) accounts for a small volume of the transplants in the USA. Due to the current liver allocation system based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), LDLT has a unique role in providing life-saving transplantation for patients with low MELD scores and significant complications from portal hypertension, as well as select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Donor safety is paramount and has been a topic of much discussion in the transplant community as well as the general media. The donor risk appears to be low overall, with a favorable long-term quality of life. The latest trend has been a gradual shift from right-lobe grafts to left-lobe grafts to reduce donor risk, provided that the left lobe can provide adequate liver volume for the recipient.

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.

Outcomes of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation in 321 recipients

We conducted a retrospective investigation in order to clarify whether selecting the type of liver graft had an impact on outcomes of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (AALDLT). Data from the medical records of the donors and the recipients of 321 consecutive cases of AALDLT performed between April 2004 and March 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Our general criteria for selecting the type of liver graft was that a left graft was preferentially selected when the estimated volume of the left graft was ≥35% of the standard liver volume of the recipient, and that a right graft was selected only when the estimated remnant liver volume of the donor was ≥35% of the total liver volume. In this series, 177 left grafts, 136 right grafts, and 8 posterior grafts were used. The left grafts tended to have 2 or more arteries, whereas the right grafts tended to have 2 or more bile duct orifices. The graft survival curves and the incidences of severe complications were comparable between the AALDLT using right grafts and the AALDLT using left grafts. The preoperative estimation of graft size hardly enabled us to predict severe posttransplant complication. Moreover, small-for-size graft syndrome occurred regardless of the estimated graft volumes. Instead, donor age was a significant risk factor for small-for-size graft syndrome. In conclusion, left grafts should be more aggressively used for the sake of donors' safety. The use of hepatic grafts from older donors should be avoided if possible in order to circumvent troublesome posttransplant complications.

Living Donor Hepatectomy: Is it Safe?

Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is high risk to a healthy donor and remains controversial. Living donor nephrectomy (LDN), conversely, is a common practice. The objective is to examine the outcomes of LDH and compare this risk profile to LDN. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for hepatectomies and nephrectomies from 1998 to 2011. LDH or LDN were identified by donor ICD-9 codes. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality and complications. Bivariate analysis compared nondonor hepatectomy or nondonor nephrectomy (NDN). Multivariate analyses adjusted for baseline organ disease, malignancy, or benign lesions. There were 430 LDH and 9211 nondonor hepatectomy. In-hospital mortality was 0 and 6 per cent, respectively ( P < 0.001); complications 4 and 33 per cent ( P < 0.001). LDH had fewer complications [odds ratio (OR) 0.15 (0.08–0.26)]. There were 15,631 LDN and 117,966 NDN. Mortality rates were 0.8 per cent LDN and 1.8 per cent NDN ( P < 0.001). Complications were 1 and 21 per cent ( P < 0.001). LDN had fewer complications [OR 0.06 (0.05–0.08)] and better survival [OR 0.32 (0.18–0.58)]. Complication rates were higher in LDH than LDN (4% vs 1%, P < 0.001), but survival was similar (0% vs 0.8% mortality, P = 0.06). In conclusion, morbidity and mortality rates of LDH are significantly lower than hepatectomy for other disease. This study suggests that the risk profile of LDH is comparable with the widely accepted LDN.

Biliary complications in pediatric liver transplantation: Incidence and management over a decade

This study analyzed how features of a liver graft and the technique of biliary reconstruction interact to affect biliary complications in pediatric liver transplantation. A retrospective analysis was performed of data collected from 2001 to 2011 in a single high-volume North American pediatric transplant center. The study cohort comprised 173 pediatric recipients, 75 living donor (LD) and 98 deceased donor (DD) recipients. The median follow-up was 70 months. Twenty-nine (16.7%) patients suffered a biliary complication. The majority of leaks (9/12, 75.0%) and the majority of strictures (18/22, 81.8%) were anastomotic. There was no difference in the rate of biliary complications associated with DD (18.4%) and LD (14.7%) grafts (P = 0.55). Roux-en-Y (RY) reconstruction was associated with a significantly lower rate of biliary complications compared to duct-to-duct reconstruction (13.3% versus 28.2%, respectively; P = 0.048). RY anastomosis was the only significant factor protecting from biliary complications in our population (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.85). The leaks were managed primarily by relaparotomy (10/12, 83.3%), and the majority of strictures were managed by percutaneous biliary intervention (14/22, 63.6%). Patients suffering biliary complications had inferior graft survival (P = 0.04) at 1, 5, and 10 years compared to patients without biliary complications. Our analysis demonstrates a lower incidence of biliary complications with RY biliary reconstruction, and patients with biliary complications have decreased graft survival.

The Assessment of Hepatosteatosis in Living-Donor Liver Transplant: Comparison of Liver Attenuation Index and Histopathologic Results

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to determine the diagnostic value of computed tomography densitometry in the quantification of hepatosteatosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-one potential liver donors, ranging in age from 19 to 52 years (mean age: 32.4 years ± 10.2), participated in the study. The mean hepatic attenuation and mean splenic attenuation were determined using regions of interest measurements. The difference between the mean hepatic attenuation and mean splenic attenuation (or liver attenuation index), with liver attenuation index = mean hepatic attenuation - mean splenic attenuation were calculated. Computed tomography densitometric parameters were correlated with histopathologic results.

RESULTS

From the histopathologic analysis, the degree of macrovesicular hepatosteatosis was 0% to 8% (mean: 1.1% ± 2%). Seven donors (13.7%) had a degree of macrovesicular steatosis of > 5%, and 12 donors (23.5%) had ≥ 2%. Of the 29 normal donors with histopathologic verification, computed tomography densitometry predicted ≤ 5% of the hepatosteatosis in 27 donors, and ≤ 2% hepatosteatosis in 2 subjects. The liver attenuation index was significantly correlated to the histopathologic results. The mathematical relation between liver attenuation index and the degree of histopathologic hepatosteatosis was calculated using the least-squares methods, which provided quadratic polynomials.

CONCLUSIONS

Computed tomography densitometry is a rapid, robust, noninvasive technique for the assessment of hepatosteatosis. When used in conjunction with clinically stable reference measurements of spleen, the density measurements of liver correctly predicted the presence of fatty infiltration with significant sensitivity (77%) and specificity (75%). This technique, which was refined during the course of our liver transplant program, minimizes the need for highly invasive percutaneous liver biopsies.

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.

Microsteatosis may not interact with macrosteatosis in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The insignificance of pure microsteatosis (MiS) was reported in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, since steatosis is mostly found in a mixed form of microsteatosis (MiS) and macrosteatosis (MaS), we aimed to determine the importance of MiS mixed with MaS in LDLT.

METHODS

Donor matching and recipient matching were independently performed with unfixed matching ratios. In donor matching, 51 donors with high (⩾30%) MiS mixed with MaS (H-MiS) were matched with 160 donors with low (⩽10%) MiS mixed with MaS (L-MiS), based on MaS degree, remnant liver volume, and others. In recipient matching, 50 recipients who received H-MiS grafts were matched with 176 recipients who received L-MiS grafts, based on MaS degree, graft volume, MELD score, and others.

RESULTS

The median MiS degree was 10% (range 0%-10%) vs. 35% (range 30%-80%) in L-MiS livers vs. H-MiS livers after both matching. L-MiS and H-MiS donors were not significantly different regarding postoperative biochemical liver function (e.g. peak AST 232 vs. 246 IU/L, p=0.931). L-MiS and H-MiS recipients were not significantly different regarding 2-week graft regeneration (51% for both) and 5-year survival (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.43-1.76, p=0.699). Post-transplant donor/recipient complication rates were not significantly different, either.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no evidences of a significant impact of MiS mixed with MaS on post-LDLT outcomes. The results suggest less importance of MiS, and further indicate that there is no interaction between MiS and MaS. Thus, the risk of steatosis may be determined by the relative composition of MiS and MaS, rather than the total quantitative degree.

Biliary complications in 108 consecutive recipients with duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction in living-donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Biliary complications remain the leading cause of postoperative complications after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients undergoing duct-to-duct choledochocholedochostomy. The aim of this study was to analyze the causes of these complications.

METHODS

One hundred eight patients who underwent LDLT with duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction at Mie University Hospital were enrolled in this study. The mean follow-up time was 58.4 months (range, 3-132). The most recent 18 donors underwent indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence cholangiography for donor hepatectomy. The development of biliary complications was retrospectively analyzed. Biliary complications were defined as needing endoscopic or radiologic treatment.

RESULTS

Biliary leakages and strictures occurred in 6 (5.6%) and 15 (13.9%) of the recipients, respectively, and 3 donors (2.7%) experienced biliary leakage. However, since the introduction of ICG fluorescence cholangiography, we have not encountered any biliary complications in either donors or recipients. Biliary leakage was an independent risk factor for the development of biliary stricture (P = .013). Twelve (80%) of the 15 recipients with biliary stricture had successful nonoperative endoscopic or radiologic management, and 3 patients underwent surgical repair with hepaticojejunosotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Biliary leakage was an independent factor for biliary stricture. ICG fluorescence cholangiography might be helpful to reduce biliary complications after LDLT in both donors and recipients.

Personal decision-making processes for living related liver transplantation in children

Living related liver transplantation (LRLT) is a valuable transplant option for children with end-stage liver disease who face long waiting times on regular waiting lists. The subjection of a healthy adult to a potentially life-threatening operation can raise issues of freedom of choice, fear, and family conflict for the potential donors. We examined attitudes, fears, and influencing factors in the decision-making process for living liver donation for children in order to identify factors to improve support for living liver donors in the future. In a retrospective, questionnaire-based survey of 93 adults evaluated for living liver donation between 1997 and 2010, 47 of whom actually proceeded to donation, we asked about attitudes, motivation, fears, influencing factors, and well-being during the LRLT evaluation process and during the donation period. Answers were recorded on Likert scales and compared with Pearson's rho correlation and the Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. Although there was a strong sense of a lack of alternatives among the donors, the majority of the donors felt free in their decision to donate. Donors who were asked to donate for a relative who was not their own child appeared at higher risk of lacking support and of feeling coerced. Family and social support and good and empathic information about the donation process were identified as key factors for donor well-being. In conclusion, potential living liver donors need to have adequate, sufficient, and empathic information, and they need to be provided a supportive framework, including family support, in order to promote their well-being. Care needs to be taken in identifying and counseling potential donors at risk of feeling coerced into donation.

Segment 4 and the left lateral segment regeneration pattern after resection of the middle hepatic vein in a living donor right hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Inclusion of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) with a right hepatectomy (RH) in live donor liver transplantation improves venous drainage of the anterior sector of the graft. Its long-term effects on donor left liver (LL) regeneration are not well described.

METHODS

Donors who underwent RH with MHV (MHV+, n = 12) were compared with donors who underwent RH with preservation of the MHV (MHV-, n = 24). Peri-operative complications and volume of the entire liver and individual segments were evaluated at 1 year post-donation.

RESULTS

There was a trend towards a higher complication rate in the MHV+ group (41% versus 25%), without reaching statistical significance (P = 0.3). Males, high body mass index (BMI) and a smaller residual liver volume (RLV) were predictors for greater LL regeneration. MHV+ donors had impaired regeneration of segment 4 (S4) at 1 year, and compensatory greater left lateral segment regeneration. The absence of venous drainage of S4 (V4) to left hepatic vein (LHV) was a predictor of impaired S4 regeneration.

CONCLUSIONS

Regeneration of S4 is impaired in MHV+ donors. Caution should be taken when considering MHV removal on donors with dominant S4, especially on those with potential increased demand for liver regeneration, such as males, higher BMI and a smaller RLV.

Comparison of the tolerance of hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury in living donors: macrosteatosis versus microsteatosis

A safe use of intermittent hepatic inflow occlusion (IHIO) has been reported for living donor hepatectomy. However, it remains unclear whether the maneuver is safe in steatotic donors. In addition, the respective importance of macrosteatosis (MaS) and microsteatosis (MiS) is an important issue. Thus, we compared MiS and MaS with respect to the tolerance of hepatic ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury induced by IHIO. One hundred forty-four donors who underwent a right hepatectomy were grouped according to the presence of MaS and MiS: a non-MaS group (n = 68) versus an MaS group (n = 76) and a non-MiS group (n = 51) versus an MiS group (n = 93). The coefficients of the regression lines between the cumulative IHIO time and the peak postoperative transaminase concentrations were used as surrogate parameters indicating the tolerance of hepatic IR injury. The coefficients were significantly greater for the MaS group versus the non-MaS group (4.12 ± 0.59 versus 2.22 ± 0.46 for alanine aminotransferase, P = 0.01). Conversely, the MiS and non-MiS groups were comparable. A subgroup analysis of donors who underwent IHIO for >30 minutes showed that MaS significantly increased the transaminase concentrations, whereas MiS had no impact. Also, IHIO for >30 minutes significantly increased the biliary complication rate for MaS donors (12.1% for ≤ 30 minutes versus 32.6% for >30 minutes, P = 0.04), whereas MiS donors were not affected. In conclusion, the tolerance of hepatic IR injury might differ between MaS livers and MiS livers. It would be rational to assign more clinical importance to MaS versus MiS. We further recommend limiting the cumulative IHIO time to 30 minutes or less for MaS donors undergoing right hepatectomy.

Effect of pure microsteatosis on transplant outcomes after living donor liver transplantation: a matched case-control study

Liver steatosis mostly exists in a mixed form of macrosteatosis (MaS) and microsteatosis (MiS). This coexistence is responsible for previous conflicting results regarding the importance of MiS in liver transplantation. We aimed to evaluate the independent effect of MiS on posttransplant outcomes with the exclusion of the confounding effect of MaS. Seventy-one living donors who had pure MiS (defined as an MiS degree > 5% without MaS) were matched 1:1 with control donors, and 66 recipients who received pure MiS grafts were matched 1:1 with control recipients on the basis of propensity scores. Matched variables included the donor age, remnant liver volume, cold ischemia time, graft-to-recipient weight ratio and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score. The degree of pure MiS ranged from 5% to 50%. Donors in the control and pure MiS groups were comparable with respect to peak postoperative transaminase concentrations [alanine aminotransferase (ALT): 194 versus 176 IU/L, P = 0.61] and postoperative complications. Recipients in the control and pure MiS groups were comparable with respect to recipient (P = 0.15) and graft survival rates (P = 0.56) as well as peak postoperative transaminase concentrations (ALT: 266 versus 281 IU/L, P = 0.88), and graft regeneration rates at 2 weeks (61% versus 59%, P = 0.73). The 2 groups were also comparable with respect to major complications, primary graft dysfunction/nonfunction, intensive care unit/hospital stays, and metabolic diseases. In conclusion, MiS alone does not seem to impair the posttransplant outcomes of living donors and their recipients. The interaction between MiS and MaS, and the effect of a greater degree of MiS are the next important topics to be further evaluated in the mixed steatosis population.

Three-dimensional computed tomography analysis of variations in the middle hepatic vein tributaries: proposed new classification

PURPOSE

To evaluate the anatomical variations in the middle hepatic vein tributaries (V5/V8) for determining the reconstruction strategy in right lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

The V5/V8 variations were examined in 268 patients and were classified into three and two types, respectively. The reconstruction rate (RR), patency rate (PR) and clinical outcomes were retrospectively evaluated in 46 right lobe LDLT cases.

RESULTS

In terms of V5 variations, the RR and PR were significantly higher for type 2 than type 3 (82.6 vs. 44.4 % and 73.7 vs. 25.0 %, respectively). The alanine aminotransferase level on postoperative day (POD) 5 in the V5 patent group was significantly lower than in the occluded group (123 vs. 191 IU/dL). Regarding V8 variations, the RR and PR were significantly higher for type 1 than type 2 (44.4 vs. 17.6 % and 75.0 vs. 33.3 %, respectively). The aspartate aminotransferase level on POD 3 was significantly lower in the V8 patent group than in the occluded group (50 vs. 121 IU/dL).

CONCLUSION

For right lobe grafts with single large V5 (type 2) or V8 (type 1) variations, reconstruction is necessary. Our new classification of the MHV tributaries is useful for determining the reconstruction strategy to use in right lobe LDLT.

Early Graft Dysfunction in Living Donor Liver Transplantation and the Small for Size Syndrome

LDLT has arisen as a viable means to reduce waitlist mortality. However, its widespread embrace by the liver transplant community has been met with frustration centered on donor morbidity and small-for-size-syndrome. Focusing on the later entity, we describe the initial recognition of this early graft dysfunction, the theorized pathophysiology and solutions to remedy its emergence.

Predictors of intra-abdominal coagulopathic hemorrhage after living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Results of preoperative conventional coagulation assays are a poor predictor of hemorrhage after liver transplantation. In this study, we evaluated the factors that are predictive of intra-abdominal coagulopathic hemorrhage after living donor liver transplantation surgery.

METHODS

During the period from January 2009 to December 2012, 118 adults underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in our institution. Of those patients, 18 (15.3%) developed intra-abdominal coagulopathic hemorrhage (n = 7) or hemorrhage due to non-coagulopathic causes (n = 11) that required emergency medical, radiological, or surgical intervention within the first month after LDLT. Possible predictors of postoperative coagulopathic hemorrhage included donor-related factors, age, body mass index, MELD score, INR value, intra-operative blood transfusion, graft/recipient weight ratio, anhepatic phase, cold ischemia time, operative time, APACHE II score, onset of re-bleeding, and hemoglobin levels during rebleeding episodes.

RESULTS

There were no differences in any of the variables between the two groups (coagulopathic and noncoagulopathic hemorrhage) except for cold ischemia time. We found that cold ischemia time was significantly longer in patients with postoperative coagulopathic hemorrhage (160.50 ± 45.02 min) than in patients with hemorrhage due to non-coagulopathic causes (113.55 ± 29.31 min; P = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged cold ischemia time is associated with postoperative intra-abdominal coagulopathic hemorrhage in patients after LDLT. It is, therefore, necessary to shorten the cold ischemia time in order to reduce the risk of postoperative intra-abdominal hemorrhage due to coagulopathic causes.

Preoperative hepatobiliary imaging: what does the radiologist need to know?

Accurate preoperative reporting is essential in guiding the surgeon in deciding when and how to operate safely and effectively. Critically, this relies on an understanding of the operative issues faced by the surgeon, which is not always appreciated by the radiologist. This paper therefore aims to address this, first focusing on relevant anatomical variants, and then issues specific to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, hepatic transplantation, and finally hepatic resection (including cholangiocarcinoma resection). Throughout the paper, there is an emphasis on associated surgical techniques to add context to the discussion.

Right hepatectomy for living donation: role of remnant liver volume in predicting hepatic dysfunction and complications

BACKGROUND

Extensive attention has been placed on remnant liver volume (RLV) above other factors to ensure donor safety.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 137 right hepatectomies in live donors between June 1999 and November 2010.

RESULTS

Median right lobe volume was 1,029 cm(3), which correlated with its actual weight (r = 0.63, P < .01); median RLV was 548 cm(3). Of the donors, 32 (24%) developed postoperative hepatic dysfunction (bilirubin >3 mg/dL or prothrombin time >18 s on postoperative day 4). RLV did not predict postoperative hepatic dysfunction (P = .9), but it was associated with peak international normalized ratio (INR) (P = .04). Donor age and male gender were predictors of increased bilirubin at postoperative day 4 (age, P = .03; gender, P = .02). Of the donors, 45 (33%) experienced complications, and 24 donors had RLVs <30%; 42% experienced complications compared to 31% of donors whose RLVs were greater than 30% (P = .3). Cell-saver utilization and aspartate-aminotransferase (AST) levels (OR = 3) were associated with complications. Volumetric assessment can predict RLV accurately.

CONCLUSION

Although no demonstrable association between RLV <30% and complications was found, an RLV of 30% should remain the threshold for donor safety. Age and gender should be balanced in donors with a near threshold RLV of 30%. Surgical complexity, suggested by the need for intraoperative autoinfusion of blood and postoperative levels of AST, remained the independent predictor of complications.

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.

Left lobe living donor liver transplantation in adults

Adult left lobe (LL) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has not generally been recognized as a feasible procedure because of the problem of graft size. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility and short- and long-term results of adult LL LDLT in comparison with right lobe (RL) LDLT. Data on 200 consecutive LL LDLTs, including five retransplants, were retrospectively compared with those of 112 RL LDLTs, in terms of survival, complications and donor morbidity. The mean graft weight to standard volume ratio of LL grafts was 38.7% whereas that of RL grafts was 47.6% (p < 0.0001). The 1-, 5- and 10-year patient survival rates of LL LDLT were 85.6%, 77.9% and 69.5%, respectively, which were comparable to those of RL LDLT (89.8%, 71.3% and 70.7%, respectively). The incidence of small-for-size syndrome was higher in LL LDLT (19.5%) than in RL LDLT (7.1%) (p < 0.01). The overall donor morbidity rates were comparable between LL (36.0%) and RL (34.8%), whereas postoperative liver function tests and hospital stay were significantly better (p < 0.0001) in LL donors. In conclusion, adult LL LDLT has comparable outcomes to that of RL LDLT. LL LDLT is viable and is the first choice in adult LDLT.

Estimates of early death, acute liver failure, and long-term mortality among live liver donors

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We sought to estimate the risk of perioperative mortality or acute liver failure for live liver donors in the United States and avoid selection or ascertainment biases and sample size limitations.

METHODS

We followed up 4111 live liver donors in the United States between April 1994 and March 2011 for a mean of 7.6 years; deaths were determined from the Social Security Death Master File. Survival data were compared with those from live kidney donors and healthy participants of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III.

RESULTS

Seven donors had early deaths (1.7 per 1000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-3.5); risk of death did not vary with age of the liver recipient (1.7 per 1000 for adults vs 1.6 per 1000 for pediatric recipients; P = .9) or portion of liver donated (2.0 per 1000 for left lateral segment, 2.8 per 1000 for left lobe, and 1.5 per 1000 for right lobe; P = .8). There were 11 catastrophic events (early deaths or acute liver failures; 2.9 per 1000; 95% CI, 1.5-5.1); similarly, risk did not vary with recipient age (3.1 per 1000 adult vs 1.6 per 1000 pediatric; P = .4) or portion of liver donated (2.0 per 1000 for left lateral segment, 2.8 per 1000 for left lobe, and 3.3 per 1000 for right lobe; P = .9). Long-term mortality of live liver donors was comparable to that of live kidney donors and NHANES participants (1.2%, 1.2%, and 1.4% at 11 years, respectively; P = .9).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of early death among live liver donors in the United States is 1.7 per 1000 donors. Mortality of live liver donors does not differ from that of healthy, matched individuals over a mean of 7.6 years.

Three-dimensional computed tomography analysis of venous collaterals between the middle hepatic vein tributaries and the right hepatic vein in the donor remnant right lobe: report of a case

We report how three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) showed the development of obvious venous collaterals between the middle hepatic vein (MHV) tributaries and the right hepatic vein (RHV) in the remnant right lobe of a donor liver. The donor was a healthy 34-year-old man who donated the left lobe of his liver with the MHV. The 3D-CT calculated that the total drainage of the MHV tributaries was 413 ml, corresponding to 59% of the total remnant liver. The congestion calculated by 3D-CT decreased from 286 ml on postoperative day (POD) 7 to 28 ml on POD 35, corresponding to 36% and 3% of the total remnant liver, respectively. The donor was discharged from hospital with almost normal liver function, and 3D-CT analysis on POD 35 detected obvious venous collaterals between the MHV tributaries and the RHV. These findings suggest that reconstruction of the MHV tributaries in the donor remnant right lobe may not be necessary.

High incidence of biliary complications in rat liver transplantation: Can we avoid it?

AIM: To investigate how to reduce the incidence of biliary complications in rat orthotopic liver transplantation.

METHODS: A total of 165 male Wistar rats were randomly divided into three groups: Group A, orthotropic liver transplantation with modified “two-cuff” technique; Group B, bile duct was cut and reconstructed without transplantation; and Group C, only laparotomy was performed. Based on the approaches used for biliary reconstruction, Group A was divided into two sub-groups:A1 (n = 30), duct-duct reconstruction, and A2 (n = 30), duct-duodenum reconstruction. To study the influence of artery reconstruction on bile duct complication, Group B was divided into four sub-groups: B1 (n = 10), duct-duct reconstruction with hepatic artery ligation, B2 (n = 10), duct-duct reconstruction without hepatic artery ligation, B3 (n = 10), duct-duodenum reconstruction with hepatic artery ligation, and B4 (n = 10), duct-duodenum reconstruction without hepatic artery ligation. The samples were harvested 14 d after operation or at the time when significant biliary complication was found.

RESULTS: In Group A, the anhepatic phase was 13.7 ± 1.06 min, and cold ischemia time was 50.5 ± 8.6 min. There was no significant difference between A1 and A2 in the operation duration. The time for biliary reconstruction was almost the same among all groups. The success rate for transplantation was 98.3% (59/60). Significant differences were found in the incidence of biliary complications in Groups A (41.7%), B (27.5%) and C (0%). A2 was more likely to have biliary complications than A1 (50% vs 33.3%). B3 had the highest incidence of biliary complications in Group B.

CONCLUSION: Biliary complications are almost inevitable using the classical “two cuff” techniques, and duct-duodenum reconstruction is not an ideal option in rat orthotopic liver transplantation.