Simplified one-orifice venoplasty for middle hepatic vein reconstruction in adult living donor liver transplantation using right lobe grafts

Technical Refinement to Prevent Hepatic Outflow Disturbance in Right Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation: The New Simplified One-Orifice Venoplasty Technique

Middle hepatic vein (MHV) reconstruction is often essential to avoid hepatic congestion and serious graft dysfunction in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This article introduces the evolution of our MHV reconstruction technique and the excellent outcomes of a new simplified one-orifice venoplasty. We compared clinical outcomes among 3 types of one-orifice techniques through a retrospective review of 378 recipients who underwent LDLT using a modified right lobe graft at our institution from January 2008 to December 2018; group I (n = 34) received separate outflow reconstruction, group II (n = 166) received the one-orifice technique to create a wider single outflow with patchwork, and group III (n = 178) received the more simplified one-orifice technique in which neo-MHV was reconstructed into the right hepatic vein without patch venoplasty. Patient demographic characteristics did not differ significantly among the 3 groups, but cold ischemic time and operative time in groups II and III were significantly shorter than those in group I. Moreover, the early patency rates of MHV in groups II and III were higher than those in group I. In particular, group I received an MHV or right hepatic vein stenting more frequently than group II or III during the early posttransplant period. In conclusion, this new simplified one-orifice technique could be an effective method to overcome technical difficulties and the outflow disturbance during right lobe LDLT without complex benchwork to create a large outflow.

Successful use of venous graft from native liver with hepatocellular carcinoma during living donor liver transplantation with no impact on recurrence rate: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There are still debates regarding using portal vein (PV) from liver with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for vascular reconstruction. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and patency of PV venous graft from an explanted liver with HCC for the reconstruction of the hepatic veins tributaries or PV in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and to see if it has any risk on recurrence of HCC.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on 81 patients with HCC who underwent LDLT from April 2004 to July 2022.

RESULTS

Venous graft from native liver PV was used for vascular reconstruction in 31 patients as follows; reconstruction of V5 in 7 patients, V8 in 4 patients, V6 in 3 patients, combined V5 and V8 in 4 patients, V6 with V5/V8 in 5 patients, and as Y shape venous graft for 2 PV reconstruction in 8 patients. The implantation of the new conduit PV graft after reconstruction of the anterior sector tributaries was direct to the IVC in 8 patients, and to the common orifice of the left and middle hepatic veins in 12 patients. The 1 month, 3 months, and 1-year overall patency of the venous graft was 93.5%, 90.3%, and 84%, respectively. Nine patients had recurrent HCC. In multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors for HCC recurrence were AFP >400 ng/mL (HR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.69-2.31, P = 0.01), moderate/poor differentiated tumor (HR = 3.06, 95% CI: 2.58-6.29, P = 0.02), and microvascular invasion (HR = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.05-1.93, P = 0.01). Using a PV venous graft had no risk factor for HCC recurrence (P = 0.9).

CONCLUSION

The use of PV venous graft of native liver with HCC for venous reconstruction is a feasible and valuable option in LDLT with good patency rates and no risk of HCC recurrence.

Single Orifice Outflow Reconstruction: Refining the Venous Outflow in Modified Right Lobe Live Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

MHV reconstruction is essential to avoid anterior sector congestion in adult live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using a modified right lobe graft.

AIMS

The objective of this study is to evaluate the graft and patient outcomes with single orifice outflow reconstruction technique (SORT) (RHV + neo-MHV combined reconstruction on IVC) vs. dual outflow reconstruction technique (DORT) (RHV and neo-MHV separately reconstructed on IVC) in a modified right lobe LDLT.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data of consecutive patients undergoing LDLT from June 2011 to August 2018 were analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups: SORT (n = 207) and DORT (n = 108). The perioperative morbidity and mortality were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable in baseline preoperative characteristics. Intraoperatively, warm ischemia time (27 vs. 45 min, p < 0.001), anhepatic phase (132 vs. 159 min, p < 0.001), and operative time (680 vs. 840 min, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in SORT group. SORT group also had significantly lower GRWR (0.92 vs. 1.06, p < 0.001) and higher portal flow (2.4 vs. 2.7 L/min, p = 0.02). Postoperatively, SORT group had lower peak AST (177 vs. 209 IU/L, p < 0.001), ALT (163 vs. 189 IU/L, p = 0.004), creatinine levels (0.98 vs. 1.10, p = 0.01), rate of severe sepsis (13.7% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.03), major morbidity (50.7% vs. 62.6%, p = 0.03), shorter ICU (9 vs. 14 days, p < 0.001), and hospital stay (21 vs. 26 days, p = 0.03). Overall survival rates were comparable.

CONCLUSION

A SORT leads to improved early graft function and perioperative morbidity in modified right lobe LDLT in spite of having lower GRWR and higher portal flow.

Single Orifice Outflow Reconstruction in Various Tributaries of the Right Liver Graft Using Commercialized Polyethylene Terephthalate Y-graft: A technical Simplification of Venous Reconstruction in 3 Cases

BACKGROUND

Hepatic vein reconstruction is very important in living donor liver transplantation to prevent outflow obstruction and maintain the graft function. In right liver grafts, reconstruction of the tributary of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) or inferior hepatic vein (IHV) is mandatory, and several options are recommended. Recently, it has been reported that a single, wide orifice is an important perquisite for adequate outflow in liver transplantation. This can be achieved by various venoplasty techniques in back table procedures using the recipient's saphenous vein, a cryopreserved vascular graft, or a synthetic vascular graft.

METHODS

Due to the insufficiency of an actual graft, we used a simple back table technique with the polyethylene terephthalate Y-graft in 3 cases of right liver grafting between October 2015 and September 2019 in Gil Medical Center. We used both arms of the Y-graft for anastomosis of the 2 largest branches of both tributaries. The main trunk of the Y-graft was then joined to the right hepatic vein (RHV). We analyzed these patients' outcomes retrospectively and the study was approved by institutional review board in Gachon University Gil Medical Center. This study strictly complies with the Helsinki Congress and the Istanbul Declaration regarding donor source and informed consent was obtained from all patients.

RESULTS

All 3 patients had good tributary patency and allograft function at discharge. The patency of the graft was maintained over a period ranging from 2 months to 2 years, without any anticoagulant administration. Regardless of the tributary patency, all patients survived with good outflow of the grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we had little prior experience in synthetic venous grafts, these cases indicate some interesting findings, with a simple and intuitive procedure. We believe our technique is a practical method for manipulating various venous tributaries in a right liver graft.

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.

Explant portal vein for reconstructing middle hepatic vein in right lobe living donor liver transplantation-outcome analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to study the four week patency rates of the reconstructed neo middle hepatic vein specifically using the explant portal vein (PV) in right hemiliver live donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We hypothesized that short term patency of the neo-MHV should result in good graft and patient outcomes.

METHODS

Pre, intra and post operative variables were prospectively collected for 88 consecutive patients undergoing right hemiliver LDLT from January 2014 to October 2015.

RESULTS

Explant PV was used to reconstruct neo-MHV in 76 (86.4%, 76/88) patients. Neo MHV patency rate at 28 days with explant PV was 89.4% (59/66) and with other conduit (PTFE) was 90.9% (10/11). All occlusions were detected after 7 days. There was no impact of the patency of the neo-MHV on the incidence of early allograft dysfunction, sepsis, rejection, morbidity or mortality, despite the contribution of the anterior sector to the graft volume being more than 50% in close to two-thirds of patients.

CONCLUSION

The reconstructed neo-MHV has excellent short term patency rates at 4 weeks. Perhaps due to the absence of early occlusions, there was no impact on graft or patient outcomes in the study population.

Simplified Unification Patch Venoplasty for Anomalous Portal Vein Branching in Living Donor Liver Transplantation With Right Lobe Graft

Double portal vein (PV) branches during living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with right lobe grafts have been considered challenging both in terms of donor safety and the complexity of vascular reconstruction in the recipient. Herein, we describe our experience with 24 adult LDLT recipients during which we employed unification patch venoplasty to reconstruct right lobe grafts with double PV orifices. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 195 adult LDLT recipients receiving right lobe grafts, including 24 cases of adult LDLT recipients in which unification patch venoplasty was used to treat double PVs from January 2010 to June 2015. The anomalous portal vein branches of the donors were of type II in 7 cases (29.2%), type III in 15 cases (62.5%), and type IV in 2 cases (8.3%). We used propensity score matching analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of these recipients with those of 59 recipients who underwent adult LDLT using right lobe grafts with normal PVs in the same period. Intraoperative PV stenting was necessary in 2 (8.3%) of the 24 recipients undergoing unification patch venoplasty. During the follow-up period, all PVs remained patent until death or censoring. No significant difference in terms of postoperative vascular complications was evident between the 2 groups. Moreover, no major complications requiring reoperation or endoscopic and/or radiologic intervention developed in any of the 24 living donors with double PVs. In conclusion, our simplified unification patch venoplasty could be safe and feasible when used to reconstruct double PV orifices in right lobe LDLT from donors with complex PV anomalies.

Diamond-shaped patch technique for right hepatic vein reconstruction in living-donor liver transplant: A simple method to prevent stenosis

Patency of the right hepatic vein (RHV) of the liver graft is essential for successful living-donor liver transplant (LDLT). We developed a simple technique for RHV reconstruction that does not require the use of cadaveric veins or additional time to prevent stenosis.Of 159 patients who underwent LDLT at our institution between May 2010 and April 2016, we included 152 in this study. Conventional RHV reconstruction was performed in 100 patients, while the diamond-shaped patch (D-patch) technique was performed in 53. For the D-patch technique, the posterior aspect of the RHV needs to be dissected from the liver parenchyma during donor hepatectomy, which prevents stenosis due to liver rotation after graft regeneration. A D-patch obtained from the hepatic vein of the recipient liver was used on the anterior aspect of the RHV for reconstruction. The Student's t test and χ test were used for statistical analysis.Rates of intervention for RHV stenosis during the first month were significantly different between the conventional reconstruction and D-patch groups (19.2% vs 3.8%; P = .01). The time taken to perform the D-patch technique was similar to that for conventional reconstruction (anhepatic period, 104.9 ± 47.3 minutes vs 106.7 ± 42.0 minutes; P = .82).The D-patch technique for RHV reconstruction in LDLT is a simple, fast, and feasible surgical technique that can be performed without using cadaveric or saphenous veins.

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation: Operative techniques to optimize the recipient's outcome

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is widely accepted today with good outcomes and safety reported worldwide for both donor and recipient. Nonetheless, it remained a highly demanding technical and complex surgery if undertaken. The last two decades have seen an increased in adult-to-adult LDLT following our first report of right lobe LDLT in overcoming graft size limitation in adults. In this article, we discussed the operative techniques and challenges of adult right lobe LDLT incorporating the middle hepatic vein, which is practiced in our center for the recipient operation. The various issues and challenges faced by the transplant surgeon in ensuring good recipient outcome are explored and discussed here as well. Hence, it is important to understand that a successful recipient operation is dependent of multifactorial events starting at the preoperative stage of planning, understanding the intraoperative technical challenges and the physiology of flow modulation that goes hand-in-hand with the operation. Therefore, one needs to arm oneself with all the possible knowledge in overcoming these technical challenges and the ability to be flexible and adaptable during LDLT by tailoring the needs of each patient individually.

Liver graft hyperperfusion in the early postoperative period promotes hepatic regeneration 2 weeks after living donor liver transplantation: A prospective observational cohort study

Hepatic regeneration is essential to meet the metabolic demands of partial liver grafts following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Hepatic regeneration is promoted by portal hyperperfusion of partial grafts, which produces shear stress on the sinusoidal endothelium. Hepatic regeneration is difficult to assess within the first 2 weeks after LDLT as the size of liver graft could be overestimated in the presence of postsurgical graft edema. In this study, we evaluated the effects of graft hyperperfusion on the rate of hepatic regeneration 2 weeks after LDLT by measuring hepatic hemodynamic parameters. Thirty-six patients undergoing LDLT were enrolled in this study. Hepatic hemodynamic parameters including peak portal venous flow velocity (PVV) were measured using spectral Doppler ultrasonography on postoperative day 1. Subsequently, we calculated the ratio of each velocity to 100 g of the initial graft weight (GW) obtained immediately after graft retrieval on the day of LDLT. Ratios of GW to recipient weight (GRWR) and to standard liver volume (GW/SLV) were also obtained. The hepatic regeneration rate was defined as the ratio of the regenerated volume measured using computed tomographic volumetry at postoperative week 2 to the initial GW. Correlations of the hemodynamic parameters, GRWR, and GW/SLV with the hepatic regeneration rate were assessed using a linear regression analysis. The liver grafts regenerated to approximately 1.7 times their initial GW (1.7 ± 0.3 [mean ± standard deviation]). PVV/100 g of GW (r = 0.224, β1 [slope coefficient] = 2.105, P = 0.004) and velocities of the hepatic artery and vein per 100 g of GW positively correlated with the hepatic regeneration rate, whereas GRWR (r = 0.407, β1 = -81.149, P < 0.001) and GW/SLV (r = 0.541, β1 = -2.184, P < 0.001) negatively correlated with the hepatic regeneration rate. Graft hyperperfusion demonstrated by increased hepatic vascular velocities and a small-sized graft in the early postoperative period contributes to hepatic regeneration 2 weeks after LDLT.

Management of the middle hepatic vein in right lobe living donor liver transplantation: A meta-analysis

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a curative treatment for end stage liver disease. It is advantageous due to the shortage of deceased donors. However, in LDLT, whether the middle hepatic vein (MHV) should be preserved in donors remains controversial. We conducted searches in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Ovid, and Google Scholar using the key words "living donor liver transplantation" and "middle hepatic vein". Due to ethical issues, there were no randomized control trails focusing on MHV in LDLT. The majority of reports were retrospective studies. We examined the reference lists to identify related investigations. Google Scholar was then used to obtain full texts. Nine observational studies were analyzed. There were no significant differences in liver function (WMD, -5.51; P=0.12) and complications (RR, 0.98; P=0.89) in donors with or without MHV. However, the liver function in recipients was greatly improved after LDLT with MHV (WMD, -78.32; P=0.01). No definite conclusion was obtained in terms of the liver regeneration indices between LDLT with or without MHV. It was conclude that grafts with MHV in LDLT favor recipient outcomes and do not harm the living donor if a careful preoperative evaluation is performed.