Impact of Right Lobe with Middle Hepatic Vein Graft in Living-Donor Liver Transplantation

Technical improvements in adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have led to the use of right-lobe grafts to overcome the problems encountered with 'small-for-size grafts'. The major controversy remains that the venous drainage from anterior segment substantially depends on tributaries of the middle hepatic vein (MHV), and deprivation of such tributaries may critically influence the postoperative graft function. Right-lobe grafts with MHV could resolve the potential problem of congestion in anterior segment. From December 2000 to January 2004, we performed 217 right-lobe LDLTs for adult patients. Of these, 40 patients received a right lobe with MHV graft (18.4%). The overall cumulative 3-year graft survival rate of a right lobe with (n = 40) and without MHV (n = 177) was 86.2% and 74.8% (p = NS). The proximal side of the MHV and the drainage vein of segment IV to the MHV (the left medial superior vein) were preserved in 24 patients. All of them needed venous interposition graft for anastomosis. All patients had a patent right hepatic vein (RHV) and MHV anastomosis during the follow-up period. We adopted the right lobe with MHV graft in 40 LDLT cases. Vein graft is essential for safe MHV anastomosis in cases which preserve proximal side of the MHV.     

Impact of venous drainage on regeneration of the anterior segment of right living-related liver grafts

The effect of additional venous reconstruction on morphologic and functional regeneration of the anterior segment of right-lobe liver grafts was compared among three groups according to graft type: right liver graft without the middle hepatic vein (MHV) or MHV tributaries (n=7), with MHV tributaries (n=25) and with the MHV (n=10). Whole graft volume (GV) and anterior segment volume (ASV) were estimated from CT scans and post-operative laboratory data and daily ascitic fluid volume were examined. Peak GV in each group was reached two or three wk after surgery. The ASV/GV ratios of the grafts with the MHV or MHV tributaries were higher than those of grafts without additional venous reconstruction. However, the asparate aminotransferase and ascitic fluid volume values in the group that received grafts with MHV tributaries were higher than in the group that received grafts with the MHV in the same period. Although rapid enlargement of the anterior segment of right-lobe grafts with MHV tributaries occurred in the early post-operative period, complete functional liver regeneration may not occur even after additional tributary reconstruction. These results suggest that the selection of right-lobe grafts with the MHV is more beneficial for recipients, as long as donor safety is protected and that as many MHV tributaries as possible should be reconstructed in right-lobe grafts without MHV.     

Efficacy of anterior segment drainage reconstruction in right-lobe liver grafts from living donors

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of additional venous reconstruction in the anterior segment has not been fully investigated for graft congestion in right-lobe liver grafts. METHODS: Posttransplant graft venous congestion in the anterior segment was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging in right-lobe living-donor liver transplantation. Additional venous reconstruction was categorized into two types: reconstruction of tributaries from segment 5 or 8 (n=11) and reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein (MHV) (n=9). Forty-five grafts only with right-sided hepatic vein(s) including the right hepatic vein served as controls. RESULTS: No significant difference in congestion score of the anterior segment was observed between grafts with V5/8 and standard grafts 1 month after transplantation despite the patency of reconstruction. Only grafts with the MHV showed no congestion (P <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Drainage reconstruction of tributaries from the anterior segment produces only suboptimal benefits when evaluated radiologically. The addition of the main trunk of the MHV with its surrounding communication has the best effect on the congestion of the anterior segment.     

Living donor right hepatectomy with inclusion of the middle hepatic vein: outcome in 200 donors

Venous congestion of segments V and VIII of the graft is observed frequently in right-lobe living donor liver transplants (LDLT) without middle hepatic vein (MHV) drainage. It can cause graft dysfunction and failure. Inclusion of the MHV in the right lobe graft allows optimal venous drainage but can pose adverse effects for the donor. From May 2005 to April 2011, we performed 202 right-lobe LDLTs using grafts that all (except two) contained the MHV. The mean duration of donor surgery was 558 ± 132 minutes (median 540, range 332-1100), and estimated blood loss 441 ± 309 mL (median 350, range 35-3200). No donor was admitted to the intensive care unit postoperatively. The mean hospital stay was 8.7 ± 2.1 days (median 8, range 6-22). Postoperatively, 39 donors (19.5%) experienced Clavien grade I and II complications, mostly minor wound infections or massive ascites necessitating diuretic therapy. Seven (3.5%) donors displayed Clavien grade III complications, including five bile leakages requiring endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage and two abdominal wound dehiscences requiring repair under general anesthesia. There was no donor death. In conclusion, inclusion of the MHV in a right-lobe LDLT was safe for most donors.     

Anterior segment congestion of a right liver lobe graft in living-donor liver transplantation and strategy to prevent congestion

Background/Purpose. A left lobe graft from a small donor will not usually fulfill the metabolic demands of a larger recipient in adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). One solution to this problem is to use a right lobe graft. However, the necessity of middle hepatic vein (MHV) outflow drainage from the anterior segment (AS) of a right lobe graft has not yet been clearly described in the literature. From July 1997 to February 1998, five right lobe grafts without MHV outflow drainage were implanted in five adult recipients. The graft weights ranged from 650 to 1000 g, and their volumes ranged from 48% to 83% of the ideal liver mass of the recipients. Two grafts showed severe congestion of the AS immediately after reperfusion, followed by prolonged massive ascites and severe liver dysfunction in each patient postoperatively. Eventually, one patient died of sepsis, on posttransplant day 20, demonstrating progressive hepatic dysfunction. Methods. Subsequently, since March 1998, 176 of 208 adult recipients who received a right lobe graft, while demonstrating sizable (greater than 5-mm diameter) MHV tributaries underwent reconstruction of MHV outflow drainage, using the recipient's own autogenous or cryopreserved cadaveric interposition vein grafts. Results. In 170 of the 176 recipients, AS congestion was not demonstrated on enhanced liver computerized tomography (CT) or Doppler ultrasonography (USG) postoperatively, and the patency rate of interposition vein grafts was 96.6% on day 30 posttransplant. Conclusions. A right lobe graft without MHV outflow drainage might result in severe congestion of the AS, which could lead to the patient's death in an extreme situation. Preservation of MHV outflow drainage in a right lobe graft is possible by two harvesting methods: an extended right lobe (ERL) graft, in which the MHV trunk is included in the graft, and a modified right lobe (MRL) graft, in which venous tributaries of the MHV are reconstructed via interposition vein grafts into the recipient's hepatic venous system. From the viewpoint of donor safety, the ERL graft increases the donor's risk more than the MRL graft, because the remaining left liver lobe of the donor does not possess an MHV. Here, we introduce our experiences of MRL grafts in adult-to-adult LDLTs. Received: July 18, 2002 / Accepted: July 25, 2002 RID="*" ID="*" Offprint requests to: S.G. Lee     

Validity of preoperative volumetric analysis of congestion volume in living donor liver transplantation using three-dimensional computed tomography.

Reconstruction of middle hepatic vein (MHV) tributaries is controversial in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of reconstructing MHV tributaries by volumetry using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT). Between November 2003 and January 2005, 42 donor livers (right-lobe graft, n = 25; left-lobe graft, n = 17) were evaluated using this software. The total congestion volume (CV) associated with the MHV tributaries and the inferior right hepatic vein (IRHV), and graft volume (GV) were calculated. In recipients with right-lobe grafts, CV/(right liver volume [RLV]) and (GV - CV)/(standard liver volume [SLV]) were compared between 2 groups: with reconstruction (n = 16) and without reconstruction (n = 9). To evaluate the influence of CV on the remnant right lobe in donors, total bilirubin was compared between 2 groups: high CV (CV > 20%, n = 13) or low CV (CV < or = 20%, n = 4). The mean CV/RLV ratio was 32.3 +/- 17.1% (V5, 15.2 +/- 9.9%; V8, 9.2 +/- 4.1%; and IRHV, 8.5 +/- 11.4%) and the maximum ratio was as high as 80.8%. The mean (GV - CV)/SLV ratio before reconstruction in patients with or without reconstruction resulted in 33.5 +/- 12.8% and 55.4 +/- 12.9%, respectively (P < 0.01). In donors, total bilirubin was significantly high in the high CV group on postoperative day 1 compared with the low CV group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, calculation of CV using 3D-CT software proved to be very useful. We concluded that this evaluation should be an integral part of procedure planning, especially for right-lobe LDLT.     

Experience with recipient's superficial femoral vein as conduit for middle hepatic vein reconstruction in a right-lobe living donor liver transplant procedure

Middle hepatic vein reconstruction during the right-lobe living donor liver transplant procedure has been recognized to be a significant factor. We initially reconstructed only a single middle hepatic vein orifice draining into segment 8. In cases where the right-lobe liver graft has several major middle hepatic vein tributaries, including veins draining segment 5 that are remote from the right hepatic vein orifice, a long and thick interposition conduit is necessary for reconstruction. Among 11 consecutive adult patients who received a right-lobe liver graft without a middle hepatic vein at our institution, 8 underwent reconstruction of all major middle hepatic vein tributaries using a vein graft from the recipient's superficial femoral vein. The remaining 3 patients had no major middle hepatic vein tributaries. Posttransplant-computed tomography imagings showed increased liver mass with a patent superficial femoral vein graft in 8 patients. In the absence of a venous system from a deceased donor, a recipient superficial femoral vein offers an excellent size match to maintain the venous outflow of middle hepatic vein tributaries. Reconstruction with recipient superficial femoral vein plays an important role in maximizing liver function and minimizing morbidity in the early posttransplant period.     

Modified right liver graft from a living donor to prevent congestion

BACKGROUND: Right liver grafts without middle hepatic vein (MHV) drainage reconstruction resulted in severe congestion of the anterior segment (AS) in our early experience of adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, a detailed strategy for preventing such congestion or the necessity of MHV reconstruction has not been discussed in LDLT using a right lobe graft. METHODS: From July 1997 to February 1998, two of five right lobe grafts without MHV drainage reconstruction were complicated with severe congestion of the AS. Thereafter, 42 adult recipients who received right liver grafts with sizable MHV tributaries underwent the reconstruction of MHV drainage. All sizable (>5 mm in diameter) MHV tributaries were preserved during donor hepatectomy and were reconstructed with the recipient's autogenous interposition vein grafts at the bench surgery. The reconstructed vein grafts of this modified right lobe graft were anastomosed to the stump of the MHV and/or left hepatic vein of the recipient after graft revascularization. RESULTS: Serial Doppler ultrasonography, which was regularly checked until 30 days posttransplant, revealed the patent interposition vein graft in 38 of 42 recipients (patency rate 90.5%). In these 38 recipients, no evidence of congestion in the AS was recognized on enhanced computed tomography, while providing enough functioning liver mass comparable to an extended right lobe graft. Also, congestion-related graft injury, such as an infarct of the AS, was not observed in these recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Our early experience indicated the necessity of MHV drainage reconstruction in right lobe grafts, which do not have MHV trunk in certain instances. However, preoperatively, it is difficult to predict the degree of AS congestion of the right liver graft without MHV drainage reconstruction. We suggest aggressive reconstruction of MHV drainage tributaries of the AS, under the circumstances that sizable MHV tributaries are encountered, to prevent possible congestion-related complications.     

Reconstruction of middle hepatic vein in living donor liver transplantation with modified right lobe graft: a single center experience

Although a right liver graft without the middle hepatic vein (MHV) can cause congestion in the anterior segment, the reconstruction of MHV tributaries and the complex procedure remain controversial. Between November 2006 and October 2007, right liver transplantation without the MHV was performed in 31 cases. A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data and two groups were formed: with MHV reconstruction (Group I, n  = 16) and without MHV reconstruction (Group II, n  = 15). We analyzed the serum liver function markers at 3 weeks postoperatively and evaluated vascular flow in the graft and interpositional vein daily by Doppler ultrasonography during the hospital stay and monthly follow-up after discharge. One patient (6.7%) died of liver congestion and acute hepatic rejection on the postoperative day 10 in Group II. Congestion was observed in another three cases (20%) of Group II and one case (6.25%) of Group I. The levels of alanine transferase and aspartate transferase in Group II was higher than those in Group I in the first week after transplantation, albeit not significantly. In Group I, most of the interpositional vein grafts were the recipient's portal veins. Venoplasty in the graft was performed in three cases. All the interpositional veins and tectonic outflow orifices were detected to be patent by ultrasonography within 14 days after transplantation. The reconstruction of the MHV tributaries is necessary in the right liver graft without MHV according to our policy and better criteria for MHV reconstruction should be established. The recipient's portal vein is an optimal choice for the interpositional vein and hepatic venoplasty in living donor liver transplantation can simplify the operation and ensure excellent venous drainage.     

Significant role of middle hepatic vein in remnant liver regeneration of right-lobe living donors

For adult patients with end-stage liver disease, living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) of right-lobe grafts with or without the middle hepatic vein (MHV) has been increasingly used in recent years. We investigated the role of the MHV in donor remnant liver regeneration after right-lobe LDLT, which has not been described in previous studies. A total of eight living donors were included in this study of right-lobe LDLT. Four donors underwent right lobectomy (without MHV), and the remaining four underwent extended right lobectomy (with MHV). Regeneration of the donor remnant liver was assessed by volumetric computed tomography studies before and 90 days after LDLT. Comparison between the right-lobe and extended right-lobe donors did not show a clear-cut difference in the net increase of remnant liver volume at 3 months. However, the mean volume increase of the medial segment at the 90th postoperative day was 7% in the extended right-lobe donors and 61% in the right-lobe donors, showing a lower value in the remnant livers without MHV. The MHV plays a specific role in remnant liver regeneration of right-lobe living donors. We expect that this knowledge will contribute to securing a margin of safety in right-lobe LDLT.     

Factors influencing liver regeneration following living-donor liver transplantation of the right hepatic lobe

BACKGROUND: As a result of the shortage of cadaveric livers for adults, many institutes perform living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using right-lobe grafts. It is important to learn whether regeneration of the graft is compromised by division of middle hepatic vein (MHV) tributaries. Accordingly, we studied the effect on graft regeneration of transection of the MHV tributaries and other factors, including graft versus body weight ratio (GRBW). METHODS: Of 100 adult recipients having undergone right-lobe LDLT, 30 6-month survivors were studied. Liver regeneration was assessed by volumetry based on the computed tomography (CT). A regeneration index was defined as the ratio of the graft volume 6 months after LDLT to the preoperative value. The dominance of the MHV tributaries over the right hepatic vein in venous drainage of the anterior segment was evaluated by preoperative CT using a 5-point scale. RESULTS: The regeneration index of the posterior segment was significantly greater than that of the anterior segment (Wilcoxon signed rank test, P=0.01). The relatively poor regeneration of the anterior segment compared with the whole graft was associated with preoperatively dominant MHV tributaries (Spearman rank correlation: R=-0.44, P=0.01). The only significant determinant of the whole-graft regeneration, however, was GRBW (stepwise regression: Y=-0.80X+0.2, R(2)=0.70, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite deprivation of MHV tributaries, a graft will regenerate to meet the metabolic demand, and a smaller graft for the recipient is capable of regenerating to a greater extent.     

Background and clinical impact of tissue congestion in right-lobe living-donor liver grafts: a magnetic resonance imaging study

BACKGROUND: Although right-lobe liver grafts from living donors have been widely accepted as an option for adult patients, impact of middle hepatic vein (MHV) deprivation is a recent controversy. METHODS: Fifty recipients of right-lobe living-donor liver grafts without MHV or drainage reconstruction in anterior segment were evaluated for posttransplant tissue congestion with T2-weighted magnetic resonance imagings. Age of recipients and donors ranged from 19 to 69 (median 50) and 19 to 64 (46) years, respectively. Graft-to-recipient weight ratio ranged from 0.74% to 1.66% (1.06%). Cavoplasty was provided during right hepatic vein reconstruction to avoid anastomotic stricture. RESULTS: Congestion was observed in 88% of segments V and 85% of segments VIII in the first month. Congestion positively correlated with anatomic dependency on MHV. Also, donors were significantly older in age in grafts with more congestion. However, congestion improved within several months in most grafts. Graft congestion was associated neither with morbidities nor with graft loss except for temporary correlation with ascites production in the third and fourth posttransplant weeks. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of right-lobe liver grafts without MHV experience morphologic congestion of the anterior segment in the early phase after transplantation, which is dependent on venous anatomy and donor age. However, the congestion spontaneously resolves in most cases. These results suggest that reconstruction of drainage vein(s) from the anterior segment is not necessary for all grafts provided good outflow through compensatory routes is secured. Additional reconstruction may be indicated in grafts with marginal size, anatomy, and quality.     

活体右半肝移植的流出道重建21例

目的 探讨活体右半肝移植中的流出道重建技术,预防肝静脉淤血的发生.方法 回顾分析21例成人活体右半肝移植的临床资料.供者标准肝体积为1150.1～1629.8 cm3,供肝重量为585～920 g,与受者标准肝体积比为43%～67%,与受者重量比为0.82%～1.59%,供者残肝体积百分比为32%～55%,供肝大泡脂肪变性均＜10%.对于含肝中静脉的供肝,将肝中静脉和肝右静脉开口修整成尽可能大的三角形开口,供肝植入时,与受者肝右静脉扩大的三角形开口行端侧吻合.不含肝中静脉的供肝,如存在粗大的肝中静脉属支(直径超过5 mm),则用自体或异体血管搭桥(无粗大的肝中静脉属支者采用肝右静脉)与受者腔静脉直接吻合.供肝门静脉右支直接与受者门静脉主干吻合,供肝动脉与受者肝动脉行端端吻合,供肝右肝管与受者肝管行端端吻合.结果 21例供肝中,4例含肝中静脉,17例不含肝中静脉,其中有2例采用自体大隐静脉搭桥,5例采用冷冻的异体髂动脉搭桥,10例采用肝右静脉直接与受者腔静脉吻合.术后1个月,重建肝中静脉属支的7例受者流出道均通畅.含肝中静脉者、不含肝中静脉的血管搭桥者及不含肝中静脉且未使用血管搭桥者术后1年存活率分别为75%、85.7%和70%,三者间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).术后受者发生胆道并发症7例;发生小肝综合征1例,经脾动脉栓塞治疗后痊愈.术后供者未发生严重并发症,随访6～31个月,均恢复正常工作生活,无一例死亡.结论 含肝中静脉与不含肝中静脉的右半供肝植入后均可取得良好的临床效果.如果右半供肝不含肝中静脉,采用自体或异体血管重建肝中静脉属支是预防肝淤血和保证移植肝功能的有效方法.     

Donor/recipient algorithm for management of the middle hepatic vein in right graft live donor liver transplantation

Background

The aim of this study was to delineate an algorithm for donor and recipient criteria and middle hepatic vein (MHV) management in right-graft live-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) on the basis of computerized 3-dimensional computed tomographic image analysis.

Methods

Data on 94 consecutive right-graft LDLTs were prospectively collected. Graft and remnant data for the first 23 cases were retrospectively evaluated by means of 3-dimensional computed tomographic reconstructions, and on the basis of that preliminary series, a graft selection algorithm using 3 parameters—hepatic vein dominance classification, graft and remnant graft volume/body weight ratios, and congestion volumes—was created. It was subsequently applied to the next 71 right-graft LDLTs.

Results

Fifty-nine right grafts contained the MHV. Four of the 12 grafts with no MHVs required MHV reconstructions. In 18 cases, small liver grafts were used. The postoperative function of liver grafts and remnants with versus without MHVs was not statistically different.

Conclusions

The proposed algorithm favored the inclusion of the MHV with the right grafts. It also allowed for the procurement of grafts that were potentially small for size without compromising donor or recipient safety.     

Techniques of reconstruction of hepatic veins in living-donor liver transplantation, especially for right hepatic vein and major short hepatic veins of right-lobe graft

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is now widely accepted as a therapeutic option for adult patients with acute and chronic end-stage liver disease. In the early period, the left lobe was the major liver graft used in adult LDLT to ensure donor safety, especially in Eastern countries. However, the frequent extremes of graft-size insufficiency in left-lobe LDLT represented a greater risk of small-for-size graft syndrome in the recipient, which has focused attention on transplantation of the right lobe from a living donor. The major concern of right-lobe LDLT has focused on its safety for the donor and the necessity for including the middle hepatic vein (MHV) in the graft to avoid congestion of the right anterior segment. The MHV carries out important venous drainage for the right anterior segment and is essential for perfect graft function. The decision of whether to take the MHV with the liver graft (extended right lobe graft) or whether to retain it in the donor, with reconstruction of the MHV tributaries in the liver graft (modified right lobe graft) has been extensively discussed in numerous studies. However, adequate right hepatic vein and major short hepatic vein (middle and inferior right hepatic vein [RHV]) drainage of the liver graft is perhaps equally important as MHV outflow drainage for the integrity of right-lobe graft function. Herein, the author describes various techniques of venoplasty of the right hepatic vein (RHV) and the major short hepatic veins to obviate venous outflow obstruction in these veins.     

Safety and necessity of including the middle hepatic vein in the right lobe graft in adult-to-adult live donor liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of donors who have donated the middle hepatic vein in right lobe live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and to determine whether such inclusion is necessary for optimum graft function. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The necessity to include the middle hepatic vein in a right lobe graft in adult-to-adult LDLT is controversial. Inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in the graft provides uniform hepatic venous drainage but may lead to congestion of segment IV in the donor. METHODS: From 1996 to 2002, 93 right-lobe LDLTs were performed. All right-lobe grafts except 1 contained the middle hepatic vein. In the donor operation, attention was paid to preserve the segment IV hepatic artery and to avoid prolonged rotation of the right lobe. The middle hepatic vein was transected proximal to a major segment IVb hepatic vein whereas possible to preserve the venous drainage in the liver remnant. RESULTS: There was no donor death. Two donors had intraoperative complications (accidental left hepatic vein occlusion and portal vein thrombosis) and were well after immediate rectification. Twenty-four donors (26%) had postoperative complications, mostly minor wound infection. The postoperative international normalized ratio on day 1 was better in the donors with preservation of segment IVb hepatic vein than those without the preservation, but, in all donors, the liver function was largely normal by postoperative day 7. The first recipient had severe graft congestion as the middle hepatic vein was not reconstructed before reperfusion. In 7 other recipients, the middle hepatic vein was found occluded intraoperatively owing to technical errors. The postoperative hepatic and renal function of the recipients with an occluded or absent middle hepatic vein was worse than those with a patent middle hepatic vein. The hospital mortality rate was also higher in those with an occluded middle hepatic vein (3/9 vs. 5/84, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of the middle hepatic vein in right-lobe LDLT is safe and is essential for optimum graft function and patient survival.     

Explanted portal vein grafts for middle hepatic vein tributaries in living-donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: The availability of a venous graft is limited in the setting of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), and the management of the middle hepatic vein middle hepatic vein tributaries in right lobe LDLT still remains controversial. METHODS: Twenty-three right lobe LDLT grafts, with the reconstruction of middle hepatic vein tributaries using the explanted portal veins from the explanted livers, were evaluated for the patency, postLDLT liver function tests, and graft survival. RESULTS: The methods of outflow reconstruction were classified into three types: the interposition of the graft to the middle/left hepatic vein (n=12), to the vena cava (n=9), and to the vena cava as a co-orifice with the graft right hepatic vein (n=2). The 1- and 3-year patency rates were 76.7% and 76.7% respectively, with the graft occlusion in five cases. The occluded cases (n=5) had significantly higher aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase levels as compared with those of patent cases (n=18) at 4 weeks after transplantation (P<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in the total bilirubin and prothrombin time in either group during the observation periods. The 1- and 3-year graft survival rates were 91.1% and 91.1%, respectively. In addition, there was no graft loss due to occlusion. CONCLUSION: The use of the recipient's explanted full-length hilar portal vein for the reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein tributaries is thus considered to be a feasible and valuable strategy in the setting of a right lobe LDLT, where appropriate vascular grafts are not always available.     

Reconstruction of Middle Hepatic Vein Tributaries With Artificial Vascular Grafts in Living Donor Liver Transplant Using Right Lobe Grafts: A Case Series

BackgroundCongestion of the anterior section of the grafted liver might be a problem when performing living donor liver transplant using a right lobe graft without middle hepatic vein (MHV). This can be prevented by MHV tributary reconstruction. We report our procedure and results of reconstructing MHV tributaries using artificial vascular grafts (AVGs).MethodsWe consider venous reconstruction when the estimated territory of each MHV tributary of the transplanted liver is more than 100 mL. For tributaries distant from the stump of the right hepatic vein of the graft, we use heparin-bonded AVGs made of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene with circular rings as the interposition graft between the MHV tributary and the inferior vena cava. During donor surgery, the suturing margin of the MHV tributary is secured before cutting, and it is anastomosed to the AVG during back-bench surgery. After restoration of portal flow in the recipient, we anastomose the AVG at a new position on the inferior vena cava.ResultsThe above procedure was performed for 4 cases. The estimated drainage territory of the vein that was reconstructed using the AVG ranged from 104 to 180 mL. The AVG patency was achieved for about 2 months in all cases. In terms of morbidity, biloma and pancreatic fistula were observed in 2 cases, although removal of the AVG was not required postoperatively in any of the cases.ConclusionThe heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene AVG with circular rings is a feasible option for MHV tributary reconstruction in living donor liver transplant using right liver lobe grafts without MHVs.     

Efficacy of right anterior sector drainage reconstruction in right-lobe live-donor transplantation

BACKGROUND: Without including the middle hepatic vein (MHV) into right-lobe grafts, venous drainage of the anterior segment (AS) has always been a concern. The efficacy and the necessity of additional venous reconstruction in the AS for graft viability and function are still controversial. METHODS: Since February 2002, 57 right-lobe grafts were implanted into adult recipients. The mean graft to ideal recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 1.3% (minimum: 0.8%, maximum 2.1%). All minor venous tributaries to the MHV less than 5 mm in diameter were ligated. The management of MHV tributaries was categorized into three groups: (A) no major tributaries (n = 33); (B) major tributaries ligated (n = 11); and (C) major tributaries reconstructed (n = 13). Reconstructions were established using vascular grafts (PTF, n = 8; cadaveric, n = 2) or joining with right hepatic vein orifice (n = 6). The groups were homogenous in age, gender, MELD (17 +/- 6, 16 +/- 4, 18 +/- 7), graft weight (817 +/- 181, 838 +/- 152, and 855 +/- 159 g), and graft/ideal liver weight ratio (0.54 +/- 0.12, 0.57 +/- 0.13, and 0.57 +/- 0.1, respectively). We investigated the volume of ascites, serum bilirubin, albumin, and liver enzyme levels and INR on postoperative day 4 (POD4) and POD21. RESULTS: Two patients died of MRSA sepsis on POD18 and POD23 (MELD: 24 and 28) after initial graft function. Their graft weights were 800 g and 980 g, and their volumes were 47% (group B) and 62% (group A) of the ideal liver mass of the recipients, respectively. One PTF and another cadaveric vascular graft were found occluded 4 and 7 days after implantation without any negative consequence. At 6-month follow-up, the remaining 55 patients were alive with primary liver grafts. Vascular reconstructions were patent except for 2 early occlusions. Among the 3 groups, no significant difference was found on POD4. Three weeks after transplantation, the mean AST level in the major ligation group (46.7 +/- 8.14) was significantly higher than in the minor ligatation group (29.6 +/- 8.6) but not in the major reconstruction group (33.7 +/- 3.7; P = .03 and P = .29). The mean albumin level was highest after minor ligation (3.2 +/- 0.18), which was significantly better than the major reconstruction (2.7 +/- 0.1) but not the major ligation (3.1 +/- 0.14) cohorts (P = .02 and P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of a limited number of cases, right-lobe liver grafts with GRWR of > or =1.1% displayed optimal graft function without additional venous reconstruction to the AS.     

Adult living donor liver transplantation with right lobe graft: the venous outflow management in the Milan-Niguarda experience

In right lobe living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT), reconstruction of middle hepatic vein (MHV) tributaries is often necessary to avoid severe graft congestion. From March 2001, we performed 36 right lobe ALDLT (segments 5, 6, 7, and 8) without MHV and one pediatric transplant (segments 2 and 3). In the presence of MHV tributaries larger than 5 mm, we intraoperatively evaluated the need for reconstruction. At a mean follow-up of 848 days (range=8-2412), 33/37 transplanted patients are alive with overall patient and graft survivals of 89.2% and 83.8%, respectively. Large MHV tributaries (>5 mm) were present in 10 cases, and inferior right hepatic veins (IRHV) draining segment 6 in 11 cases. In 10 cases, we performed an end-to-side anastomosis between the IRHV and the side of the recipient vena cava. In three cases, the MHV tributaries were end-to-end anastomosed to the stump of the recipient MHV. In all other cases, the vein tributaries were not reconstructed. A computed tomography scan performed from 1 to 3 months after surgery did not show any congested area in the liver parenchyma. In our experience, reconstruction of the MHV tributaries was not always necessary when graft-to-recipient weight ratio is >0.8. Pre- and intraoperative evaluation of the segmental branches of the hepatic vein is crucial to decide about reconstructing these collaterals. Anastomosis of V5 or V8 to the stump of the recipient MHV reduces the number of vascular anastomosis and maintains a physiological angle between these collaterals and the caval vein.