静脉移植物在成人间活体肝移植中应用的研究

目的研究移植血管在成人间活体右半肝移植（LDLT）中的应用。方法对26例成人间LDLT患者，用大隐静脉重建肝Ⅴ、Ⅷ段肝中静脉粗大属支，及右肝下静脉，用大隐静脉补片修补供体门静脉损伤．狭窄以及肝动脉搭桥。结果利用大隐静咏重建Ⅴ、Ⅷ段肝中静脉粗大属支和右肝下静脉流出道20例，其总的重建率76．9％（20／26），其中重建一支静脉15例，重建两支静脉5例。重建引流的模式和病例数如下：Ⅴ53例，Ⅴ82例，Ⅴ5和Ⅴ83例，V5和右肝下静脉1例，Ⅴ8和右肝下静脉1例，右肝下静脉10例。肝动脉搭桥率11．5％（3／26），肝动脉和腹主动脉间大隐静脉搭桥2例，肝动脉与肝动脉间夫隐静脉搭桥1例。供体门静脉补片1例。所有病例术中和术后随访2～48月，超声检查均未发现血栓，血流通畅。结论自体大隐静脉在LDLT术中重建Ⅴ5、Ⅴ8及右肝下静脉流出道和肝动脉搭桥，能有效预防小肝综合征和动脉并发症。     

Simplifying living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND:Living donor liver transplantation is a complex surgical operation.Treatment policies and operative techniques evolved in the last two decades.DATA SOURCES:Our center's experience in living donor liver transplantation was reviewed in conjunction with relevant publications in the literature.RESULTS:The surgical techniques and perioperative surgical therapeutics could be modified towards simplicity.Examples include regular inclusion of the middle hepatic vein without compromising the venous outflow...     

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation has become the subject of a great deal of attention over the last few years. Until the use of the donor right lobe was introduced and demonstrated to be relatively safe, it was not possible to offer this alternative to conventional transplantation to most adults. Recent clinical work has focused on the results of these procedures in both donors and recipients, perfecting surgical techniques for right-lobe transplantation, streamlining donor evaluation protocols, and containing costs. This overview summarizes many of the recent publications and presentations in the field of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation.     

Gore-Tex jump graft for portal vein thrombosis following living donor liver transplantation

Portal vein thrombosis is a rare surgical complication following liver transplantation, which remains a cause of graft loss and death. We describe here the treatment of portal vein thrombosis following living donor liver transplantation using an extended left lobe graft. The patient was treated with a Gore-Tex vascular jump graft extra-anatomically interposed between the recipient superior mesenteric vein and the donor umbilical vein. This technique allowed the hepatic hilum to be left untouched and supplied suitable blood flow to the hepatic allograft. Our experience suggests that this innovative technical solution can be helpful in the effort to rescue cases of hepatic allograft with vascular complications.     

Splenectomy in living donor liver transplantation and risk factors of portal vein thrombosis

BackgroundGraft inflow modulation (GIM) during adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a common strategy to avoid small-for-size syndrome, and some transplant surgeons attempt small size graft strategy with frequent GIM procedures, which are mostly performed by splenectomy, in LDLT. However, splenectomy can cause serious complications such as portal vein thrombosis and overwhelming postsplenectomy infection.MethodsForty-eight adult-to-adult LDLT recipients were enrolled in this study and retrospectively reviewed. We applied the graft selection criteria, which routinely fulfill graft-to-recipient weight ratio ≥ 0.8%, and consider GIM as a backup strategy for high portal venous pressure (PVP).ResultsIn our current strategy of LDLT, splenectomy was performed mostly due to hepatitis C and splenic arterial aneurysms, but splenectomy for GIM was intended to only one patient (2.1%). The final PVP values ≤ 20 mmHg were achieved in all recipients, and no significant difference was observed in patient survival or postoperative clinical course based on whether splenectomy was performed or not. However, 6 of 18 patients with splenectomy (33.3%) developed postsplenectomy portal vein thrombosis (PVT), while none of the 30 patients without splenectomy developed PVT after LDLT. Splenectomy was identified as a risk factor of PVT in this study (P < 0.001). Our study revealed that a lower final PVP could be risk factor of postsplenectomy PVT.ConclusionsUsing sufficient size grafts was one of the direct solutions to control PVP, and allowed GIM to be reserved as a backup procedure. Splenectomy should be avoided as much as possible during LDLT because splenectomy was found to be a definite risk factor of PVT. In splenectomy cases with a lower final PVP, a close follow-up is required for early detection and treatment of PVT.     

Efficacy of middle hepatic vein reconstruction in adult right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND:Congestion of the right anterior segment may lead to graft dysfunction in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation(LDLT)without a middle hepatic vein(MHV) trunk.Selective reconstruction of MHV tributaries with the interposition of vascular grafts has been introduced to overcome this problem.However,there is still no consensus on the definite criteria of MHV reconstruction. METHODS:LDLT patients were reviewed to evaluate the effects of MHV reconstruction.From March 2005 to September 2008 in o...     

Outcome of living donor liver transplantation in patients with preoperative portal vein thrombosis

Background and study aimsPortal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer an absolute contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study aimed to assess the short-term outcomes of LDLT and compare the 1-year survival rates between patients with and without preoperative PVT.Patients and methodsThis combined prospective and retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent LDLT at Ain Shams Centre for Organ Transplantation (ASCOT) between 2008 and 2020. The study included 60 patients with PVT and 60 patients without PVT. The two groups were compared in terms of preoperative data, operative details, postoperative complications, and 1-year survival.ResultsMost patients with PVT were Child C (65%) and had higher model for end stage liver disease scores (16.23 ± 4.03) compared to the non-PVT group (13.9 ± 4.5). The PVT group showed longer cold ischemic time (CIT), hospital stay, and intensive care unit stay and significantly shorter 1-year survival rate (63.3%) compared to the non-PVT group (86.7%) (P = 0.003). Those with PVT grades I, II, and III had 1-year survival rates of 72.5%, 50%, and 40%, respectively.ConclusionPreoperative PVT reduces the 1-year survival after transplantation, with patients with higher PVT grades exhibiting lower 1-year survival. LDLT for PVT still remains challenging and requires further studies.     

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation.

The present review outlines the principles of living donor liver transplantation, donor workup, procedure and outcomes. Living donation offers a solution to the growing gap between the need for liver transplants and the limited availability of deceased donor organs. With a multidisciplinary team focused on donor safety and experienced surgeons capable of performing complex resection/reconstruction procedures, donor morbidity is low and recipient outcomes are comparable with results of deceased donor transplantation.     

Small-for-size syndrome in living donor liver transplantation

When the graft volume is too small to satisfy the recipient's metabolic demand, the recipient may thus experience small-for-size syndrome (SFSS). Because the occurrence of SFSS is determined by not only the liver graft volume but also a combination of multiple negative factors, the definitions of small-for-size graft (SFSG) and SFSS are different in each institute and at each time. In the clinical setting, surgical inflow modulation and maximizing the graft outflow are keys to overcoming SFSS. Accordingly, relatively smaller-sized grafts can be used with surgical modification and pharmacological manipulation targeting portal circulation and liver graft quality. Therefore, the focus of the SFSG issue is now shifting from how to obtain a larger graft from the living donor to how to manage the use of a smaller graft to save the recipient, considering donor safety to be a priority.     

Ethical issues in living donor liver transplantation

The cadaveric organ shortage and the high mortality rate while patients wait for an organ have driven the medical community to develop alternative strategies for treating patients with end-stage liver disease. Adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDT) has evolved in response to the cadaveric organ shortage. Although there are benefits for recipients of ALDT, donors may incur substantial risk, including death. In contrast to pediatric living donation, in which the left lateral segment of the liver is resected from a donor, ALDT generally requires right hepatectomy, which is associated with greater morbidity and mortality. Because ALDT places a healthy individual at risk for substantial morbidity and mortality, debate over the ethics of this procedure is ongoing. Two donor deaths have occurred in the United States, adding to the concern over donor safety. Despite the risks associated with ALDT, many individuals elect to proceed with living donation with the hope of improving the life of a relative or friend. When considering whether we as a society should support and encourage ALDT, we should examine the perspective of the donor, recipient, and medical community as well. The medical community has an obligation to study carefully the risks and outcomes associated with ALDT so that we can deliver the highest quality of care that is not at the expense of healthy individuals.     

Techniques for overcoming atretic changes of the portal vein in living donor liver transplantation

BackgroundSpontaneous diversion of the portal flow through collateral vessels into the systemic circulation is frequently observed in liver transplant recipients with severe portal hypertension. This induces main portal vein atretic change and modifies flow into the collateral even after donor graft implantation. These atretic changes make liver transplantation challenging. In this article we described several methods for overcoming this challenge by appropriate surgical techniques.MethodsThree anastomotic techniques for living donor liver transplantation were performed in patients with atretic changes in the portal vein.ResultsThe three techniques were (1) venoplasty to widen the diameter by using the recipient's portal vein, and the diameter of the recipient's portal vein was enlarged using their own portal vein stump patch; (2) conduit with cryopreserved vessels, and we dissected around the superior mesenteric vein and splenic vein junction and a conduit was built using the cryopreserved vessels; and (3) left gastric varix to portal vein anastomosis, if the recipients had large gastric varix and variceal wall was sufficiently thick for anastomosis.ConclusionsSelection of optimal methods for portal vein anastomosis is essential in patients with atrophic change on the portal vein. If these methods are used aptly, they can be considered as favorable methods for overcoming each situation.     

Anatomy of the middle hepatic vein: applications to living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In living donor liver transplantation, right lobe graft without a middle hepatic vein (MHV) results in potential venous congestion in the anterior segment, while transplantation with MHV represents an important ethical issue from the perspective of donor safety. The present study assessed ramification patterns of the MHV and relationships between hepatic venous drainage of the anterior and medial segments, to plan optimal harvesting of the right lobe as a graft. METHODOLOGY: The authors reviewed 102 patients with normal livers who underwent contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT. RESULTS: The hepatic vein that drained S4sup (V4sup) joined only the left hepatic vein (LHV) in 60 patients (58%), only the MHV in 25 (25%), and both LHV and MHV in 17 (17%). Both V4sup and the hepatic vein that drained S8 (V8) joined the MHV in 42 patients (42%), and V8 joined proximal to V4sup in 18 of these 42 patients. CONCLUSIONS: In donation of a right lobe graft including MHV, preservation of V4sup in the remnant donor liver seems possible in most donors.     

Outcomes of donor evaluation in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

The purpose of donor evaluation for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is to discover medical conditions that could increase the donor postoperative risk of complications and to determine whether the donor can yield a suitable graft for the recipient. We report the outcomes of LDLT donor candidates evaluated in a large multicenter study of LDLT. The records of all donor candidates and their respective recipients between 1998 and 2003 were reviewed as part of the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL). The outcomes of the evaluation were recorded along with demographic data on the donors and recipients. Of the 1011 donor candidates evaluated, 405 (40%) were accepted for donation. The donor characteristics associated with acceptance (P < 0.05) were younger age, lower body mass index, and biological or spousal relationship to the recipient. Recipient characteristics associated with donor acceptance were younger age, lower Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, and shorter time from listing to first donor evaluation. Other predictors of donor acceptance included earlier year of evaluation and transplant center. CONCLUSION: Both donor and recipient features appear to affect acceptance for LDLT. These findings may aid the donor evaluation process and allow an objective assessment of the likelihood of donor candidate acceptance.     

Applicability of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The applicability of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation has not been established yet. We report the first data in a European center of the process leading to this procedure from the first moment the patients were informed about it. METHODS: In phase 1 of the process, 121 adult patients enlisted for cadaveric liver transplantation and their relatives were informed of the technical aspects, advantages and risks of living donor liver transplantation, and the essential criteria for living donation. In phase 2, potential donors identified in phase 1 were evaluated in depth. RESULTS: Twenty-one (17%) patients underwent living donor liver transplantation. This procedure was not performed in 60 patients (50%) for reasons concerning the patients themselves, especially their refusal to receive living donor liver transplantation from a relative (30%). Forty patients (33%) did not undergo living donor liver transplantation for reasons concerning potential donors: donors were not identified (14%), declined the donation (13%), or were refused for technical reasons (6%). The expected waiting time to transplantation was longer in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation than in those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: The applicability of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation is low, mainly because of reasons related to potential recipients.     

Historical perspective of living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation （LDLT） has gone through its formative years and established as a legitimate treatment when a deceased donor liver graft is not timely or simply not available at all. Nevertheless, LDLT is characterized by its technical complexity and ethical controversy. These are the consequences of a single organ having to serve two subjects, the donor and the recipient, instantaneously. The transplant community has a common ground on assuring donor safety while achieving predictable recipient success. With this background, a reflection of the development of LDLT may be appropriate to direct future research and patientcare efforts on this life-saving treatment alternative.     

Asian contribution to living donor liver transplantation

Although the shortage of brain-dead donor organs is a worldwide problem, the situation is especially serious in Asia because of various cultural and social reasons, and cadaveric organ donation remains below 5 per million population per year. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) could provide an alternative for liver graft for patients with acute and chronic end-stage liver disease. This article introduces the important contributions to the development of LDLT by the leading Asian liver transplantation centers. The first successful adult LDLT using a left-lobe graft was reported by Makuuchi et al. from Japan in 1994. To overcome the barrier of graft-size matching for adult patients with use of a left-lobe graft, a trial of adult LDLT using a right-lobe graft with middle hepatic vein was reported with satisfactory outcome by Fan et al. from Hong Kong in 1997. Despite the impressive results of right-lobe LDLT, considerable debate persists concerning donor safety. Lee et al. from Korea initiated modified right-lobe liver grafting with interposition vein grafts to drain anterior segment and two left-lobe liver grafting to overcome graft-size insufficiency and to ensure donor safety in 1999 and 2000, respectively. In addition to technical innovations, indications for liver transplantation have been developed by Asian centers as LDLT activity has increased.