Influence of surgical technique in donor hepatectomy on immediate and short-term living donor outcomes - A systematic review of the literature, meta-analysis, and expert panel recommendations

The learning curve for robotic living donor right hepatectomy: Analysis of outcomes in 2 specialized centers

Robotic surgery is an emerging minimally invasive option for living donor hepatectomy. Currently, there are no studies on the learning curve of robotic donor hepatectomy. Thus, we evaluated the learning curve for robotic donor right hepatectomy. We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from consecutive living donors who underwent robotic hepatectomy at 2 specialized centers between 2016 and 2022. We estimated the number of cases required to achieve stable operating times for robotic donor right hepatectomy using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. The complication rates were similar between the 2 centers (22.8% vs. 26.7%; p = 0.74). Most complications were graded as minor (70.4%). Analysis of the total operative time demonstrated that the learning curves reached a peak at the 17th case in center 1 and the 9th case in center 2. The average operation times for cases 1-17 versus 18-99 in center 1 were 603 versus 438 minutes ( p < 0.001), and cases 1-9 versus 10-15 in center 2 were 532 versus 418 minutes ( p = 0.002). Complication rates were lower after the learning curves were achieved, although this did not reach statistical significance. A comparison of outcomes between centers suggests that a standardized approach to this complex operation can be successfully transferred.

The aim of donor safety: surgical approaches and current results

Living liver donation (LLD) has been suggested as a potential solution to reduce the waitlist mortality for liver transplantation (LT) recipients by facilitating living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Ensuring both donor and recipient safety is a critical aspect of LDLT. An accurate understanding of the complexity and extend of safety outcomes of the donor is imperative to maintain the high-quality standard this medical program requires. This review seeks to outline safety outcome parameters of interest for donors. Early postoperative mortality is very low with no significant differences comparing left lobe to right lobe LLD. Complications most commonly are biliary (leakage or strictures), bleeding, respiratory or pulmonary, gastrointestinal or infectious. Return to full-time work and quality of life are essential parameters in the mid and long term. As evidence continues to accumulate, outcomes may evolve with the expansion of minimal invasive surgery practice and currently laparoscopic approach is recommended in large experienced centers. By offering safer operations that require fewer incisions or liver resections, living liver donations can be further encouraged, and the perception of the procedure can be improved. Rational consideration of the safety of the donor and in-depth discussion and evaluation with the patient is of utmost importance.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy

The value of minimally invasive approaches for living donor hepatectomy remains unclear. Our aim was to compare the donor outcomes after open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy (OLDH vs. LALDH vs. PLLDH vs. RLDH). A systematic literature review of the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement (up to December 8, 2021). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed separately for minor and major living donor hepatectomy. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A total of 31 studies were included. There was no difference in donor outcomes after OLDH versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. However, PLLDH was associated with decreased estimated blood loss, length of stay (LOS), and overall complications versus OLDH for minor and major hepatectomy, but also with increased operative time for major hepatectomy. PLLDH was associated with decreased LOS versus LALDH for major hepatectomy. RLDH was associated with decreased LOS but with increased operative time versus OLDH for major hepatectomy. The scarcity of studies comparing RLDH versus LALDH/PLLDH did not allow us to meta-analyze donor outcomes for that comparison. There seems to be a marginal benefit in estimated blood loss and/or LOS in favor of PLLDH and RLDH. The complexity of these procedures limits them to transplant centers with high volume and experience. Future studies should investigate self-reported donor experience and the associated economic costs of these approaches.

Enhanced recovery for liver transplantation: recommendations from the 2022 International Liver Transplantation Society consensus conference

There is much controversy regarding enhanced recovery for recipients of liver transplants from deceased and living donors. The objectives of this Review were to summarise current knowledge on individual enhanced recovery elements on short-term outcomes, identify key components for comprehensive pathways, and create internationally accepted guidelines on enhanced recovery for liver-transplant recipients. The ERAS4OLT.org collaborative partnered by the International Liver Transplantation Society performed systematic literature reviews on the effect of 32 relevant enhanced perioperative recovery elements on short-term outcomes, and global specialists prepared expert statements on deceased and living donor liver transplantation. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used for rating of quality of evidence and grading of recommendations. A virtual international consensus conference was held in January, 2022, in which results were presented, voted on by the audience, and discussed by an independent international jury of eight members, applying the Danish model of consensus. 273 liver transplantation specialists from 30 countries prepared expert statements on elements of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation based on the systematic literature reviews. The consensus conference yielded 80 final recommendations, covering aspects of enhanced recovery for preoperative assessment and optimisation, intraoperative surgical and anaesthetic conduct, and postoperative management for the recipients of liver transplants from both deceased and living donors, and for the living donor. The recommendations represent a comprehensive overview of the relevant elements and areas of enhanced recovery for liver transplantation. These internationally established guidelines could direct the development of enhanced recovery programmes worldwide, allowing adjustments according to local resources and practices.