What is the best immunosuppression in living donor liver transplantation?

INTRODUCTION: As we have learned, there are no golden rules of immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation, and every transplant program is using its own regimen to prevent or treat rejection. We have retrospectively analyzed the incidence and severity of acute rejection in a consecutive series of living donor liver transplants. The major objective during the whole study period was to ultimately avoid any steroids from the beginning. METHODS: Twenty one adult patients and five children received 23 right, one left, and two left lateral lobe grafts from genetically or emotionally related living donors, including four ABO-incompatible pairs. The majority of patients had triple initial immunosuppression, based on tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil or sirolimus, and basiliximab or daclizumab. Except methylprednisolone administered before reperfusion in 13 patients, only seven had prednisolone after transplantation, and 12/26 had a completely steroid-free regimen. RESULTS: The overall incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 4/21 in adults (19%) and 4/5 in children (80%). Rejections were mild in five and moderate in three cases, respectively, and easily reversed with steroids in all patients. Different combinations of immunosuppressive drugs or ABO incompatibility did not seem to have an influence on the risk of rejection. CONCLUSION: Despite the small number of patients in this series, completely steroid-free triple-drug immunosuppression with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and basiliximab is safe and efficient to prevent acute rejection in adult recipients of living donor liver transplants. At least short-term administration of prednisolone should be considered in pediatric patients.     

Varicella zoster virus disease after pediatric living donor liver transplantation: is it serious?

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate patients who developed varicella zoster virus (VZV) disease after pediatric living donor liver transplantation (PLDLT).

Methods

Two hundred fifty-five patients who underwent PLDLT between 1995 and 2010 were included in this study. Pretransplantation vaccination of VZV was performed for all recipients except emergency PLDLTs. Posttransplantation VZV vaccination was administered to the patients with a low VZV antibody titer 2 years or more after transplantation. The clinical course and outcomes of VZV disease in cases were reviewed with the transplant database and hospital medical records.

Results

Sixty-three patients developed VZV disease (chicken pox in 61, herpes zoster in 2) at a median onset of 36 months after PLDLT and at a median age of 4 years old, with a cumulative incidence of 25%. All chicken pox occurred in VZV antibody-negative patients. The onset of herpes zoster in the two patients occurred within 3 months after PLDLT; in addition, these patients were VZV antibody-positive patients. The clinical presentations of most patients were not serious and there were no disseminated infections. Although only 3 patients (5%) were hospitalized, the other 60 patients (95%) all showed a good response to oral antiviral therapy.

Conclusions

Although VZV disease is an infectious disease with a high morbidity rate after PLDLT, it can normally be successfully managed on an outpatient basis at home. Pre- and posttransplantation vaccinations are effective for delaying the onset of chicken pox after PLDLT and to prevent it from developing into a serious illness.     

Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation and living related donor renal transplantation in patients with diabetes: is there a difference in survival?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) and living related donor renal transplantation (LRD) in patients with diabetes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: It remains unanswered whether diabetic patients with end-stage renal failure are better served by LRD or SPK. METHODS: Using a longitudinal database, data from all diabetic patients receiving LRD or cadaveric renal transplants or SPKs from January 1986 through January 1996 were analyzed. Patient and graft survival, early graft function, and the cause of patient and graft loss were compared for 43 HLA-identical LRDs, 87 haplotype-identical LRDs, 379 SPKs, and 296 cadaveric renal transplants. RESULTS: The demographic composition of the SPK and LRD groups were similar, but because of less strict selection criteria in the cadaveric transplant group, patients were 10 years older, more patients received dialysis, and patients had been receiving dialysis longer before transplantation. Patient survival was similar for the SPK and LRD groups but was significantly lower for the cadaveric renal transplant group. Similarly, there was no difference in graft survival between SPK and LRD recipients, but it was significantly lower for recipients in the cadaveric renal transplant group. Delayed graft function was significantly more common in the cadaveric renal transplant group. Discharge creatinine, the strongest predictor of patient and graft survival, was highest in the SPK group and lowest in the HLA-identical LRD group. The rate of rejection within the first year was greatest in SPK patients (77%), intermediate in the haplotype-identical LRD and cadaveric transplant groups (57% and 48%, respectively), and lowest (16%) in the HLA-identical LRD group. Cardiovascular disease was the primary cause of death for all groups. Acute rejection, chronic rejection, and death with a functioning graft were the predominant causes of graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that there was no difference in patient or graft survival in diabetic patients receiving LRD or SPK transplants. However, graft and patient survival rates in diabetic recipients of cadaveric renal transplants were significantly lower than in the other groups.     

Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after living donor liver transplantation: what is the current optimal approach to prevent recurrence?

Background  

Liver transplantation plays an important role in the multimodal treatment options for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there has been little information about the prognosis for HCC recurrence after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).     

Small-for-size graft in living donor liver transplantation: How far should we go?

With the extensive use of living donor liver grafts in adult patients, controversy over small-for-size syndrome has escalated in recent years. Although several symptoms have been suggested as manifestations of the syndrome, small-for-size syndrome remains difficult to diagnose because these symptoms are neither specific nor inevitable. The occurrence of small-for-size syndrome also seems to depend on a number of recipient and graft factors. Potential pathogenic mechanisms include persistent portal hypertension and portal overperfusion. At present, several techniques are being explored in an attempt to ameliorate the impact of small-for-size syndrome. Recent experience suggests that the occurrence of small-for-size syndrome is multifactorial and that complications relating to small-for-size grafts should be examined in relation to a variety of graft, recipient, and technical factors. (Liver Transpl 2003;9:S29-S35.)     

Single-port laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy in living donor liver transplantation: sensible approach or unnecessary hindrance?

Background

Single-port laparoscopic (SPL) surgery has rapidly gained attention worldwide. Since May 2008, we have propagated the use of SPL surgery, mainly for cholecystectomy and appendectomy. Recently, we have used this modality of minimally invasive surgery for various liver surgeries. We hereby discuss our outcomes of SPL-assisted donor right hepatectomies.

Methods

The preoperative workup is the same as for a standard donor hepatectomy. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 150 patients who underwent donor right hepatectomy from October 2008 to May 2011. We divided them into 3 groups depending on the type of surgical procedure.

Results

Among 150 patients, 20 underwent laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy (LADRH); 40 underwent single-port laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy (SPLADRH); and 90 underwent open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH). The donor demographics were comparable among the groups. Postoperative complication and reoperation rates revealed no significant differences. The SPLADRH group showed the lowest level of postoperative pain, thereby leading to a better quality of life postoperatively.

Conclusions

SPLADRH seems to be a simple, feasible approach.     

Donor information for living donor liver transplantation: where can comprehensive information be found?

Recently published data show that a large number of candidates for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) actively look for additional information on the Internet because today it represents the main source of information for many of them. However, little is known about the quality of the information on LDLT available on the Internet. Our aim was, therefore, to comprehensively evaluate the online information available for LDLT candidates with the expanded Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool (0-36 items). One hundred Web sites on LDLT were initially found with the Google, Bing, and Yahoo search engines, and we identified 32 Web sites that provided specific information for such candidates in English. Only 9 Web sites addressed >20 items and the scores tended to be higher for educational (P = 0.13) and scientific sites (P = 0.07) compared to hospital sites. The median number of items from the EQIP tool was only 16 (interquartile range = 13-20), and quantitative postoperative morbidity and mortality risk estimates were available on only 19% and 44% of the Web sites, respectively, despite the idea of major complications being mentioned on most Web sites. This analysis demonstrated several significant shortcomings in the quality of the information provided to potential donors for LDLT according to the EQIP instrument. We conclude that there is an urgent need to produce a Web site compliant with international standards for the quality of donor information.     

Left lobe adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation: Should portal inflow modulation be added?

Recently, the successful application of portal inflow modulation has led to renewed interest in the use of left lobe grafts in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, data on the hepatic hemodynamics supporting portal inflow modulation are limited, and the optimal portal circulation for a liver graft is still unclear. We analyzed 42 consecutive adult-to-adult left lobe LDLT cases without splenectomy or a portocaval shunt. The mean actual graft volume (GV)/recipient standard liver volume (SLV) ratio was 39.8% ± 5.7% (median = 38.9%, range = 26.1%-54.0%). The actual GV/SLV ratio was less than 40% in 24 of the 42 cases, and the actual graft-to-recipient weight ratio was less than 0.8% in 17 of the 42 recipients. The mean portal vein pressure (PVP) was 23.9 ± 7.6 mm Hg (median = 23.5 mm Hg, range = 9-38 mm Hg) before transplantation and 21.5 ± 3.6 mm Hg (median = 22 mm Hg, range = 14-27 mm Hg) after graft implantation. The mean portal pressure gradient (PVP - central venous pressure) was 14.5 ± 6.8 mm Hg (median = 13.5 mm Hg, range = 3-26 mm Hg) before transplantation and 12.4 ± 4.4 mm Hg (median = 13 mm Hg, range = 1-21 mm Hg) after graft implantation. The mean posttransplant portal vein flow was 301 ± 167 mL/minute/100 g of liver in the 38 recipients for whom it was measured. None of the recipients developed small-for-size syndrome, and all were discharged from the hospital despite portal hyperperfusion. The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 100%, 97%, and 91%, respectively. In conclusion, LDLT with a left liver graft without splenectomy or a portocaval shunt yields good long-term results for adult patients with a minimal donor burden.     

Is microsurgical technique useful in biliary reconstruction of living donor liver transplantation?

Introduction

Biliary reconstruction remains the “Achilles' heel” of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). In the last decades, the technical aspects of biliary reconstruction have been debated for their impact on biliary complications in LDLT. A microsurgical technique in biliary reconstruction is more attractive.

Patients and methods

From December 2010 to June 2011, 15 primary LDLTs underwent duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction using a microscopic technique. External stents were inserted in all patients. All procedures were performed under a microscope by a single transplant microsurgeon.

Results

The time consumed for bile duct reconstruction using the microscopic technique was 35 minutes. There were 8 grafts with a single bile duct orifice and seven with two orifices. The average duct size was 3 mm in patients with two orifices and 5 mm in those with a single orifice. There was no bile leak or biliary stricture associated with the biliary reconstruction over a median 5-month follow-up. There were two cases of bile leakage from the cut hepatic surface.

Conclusion

The microscopic technique reduced early biliary complications. However, further technical advances are needed to decrease the time consumptions for the procedure.     

Preoperative evaluation of living related kidney donor: which kidney to donate?

OBJECTIVES: As the number of cadaveric donor is far beyond the demand of the waiting list, living related kidney transplantation is important for the worldwide organ shortage. Besides, living related transplantation has advantages compared with cadaveric transplantation in terms of graft function and survival. However, the remaining kidney function of the living donor needs to be evaluated. METHODS: We collected 28 paired living kidney donations from March 2003 to March 2005. All patients underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The preoperative kidney evaluation included renal echography, renal nuclear scan, computed tomography angiography (CTA), and creatinine clearance (CCr). The renal function of the donor kidney was expressed as (donor kidney/both kidneys)%. The percentage renal function from renal echography, renal nuclear scan, and CTA were correlated with CCr. RESULTS: The mean percentage of donor kidney function according to renal echo, nuclear scan, and CTA were 49.77%, 51.83%, and 50.70%, respectively. The correlation coefficients for renal echography, nuclear scan, and CTA to CCr were -0.316, -0.201, and 0.123, respectively. The correlation coefficients for renal echography, nuclear scan, and CTA to postoperative serum creatinine of donor were 0.426, 0.036, and -0.119, respectively. CONCLUSION: From the viewpoint of donor postoperative residual renal function, preoperative renal sonography offered a better predictive value than nuclear scan or CTA.