Laparoscopic organ retrieval for living donor liver transplantation does not prevent graft injury

The cause of transplant failure may be difficult to define. However, organ retrieval before preservation and transplantation is an important factor. Organ manipulation during harvesting, which is inevitable with most techniques, leads to injury upon reperfusion including microcirculatory disturbances. Recently, laparoscopic organ retrieval has been successfully performed for human living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopy changes the pattern of hepatic blood flow. To study the effects of pneumoperitoneum on the graft prior to cold storage, livers from Sprague-Dawley rats underwent pneumoperitoneum with an intra-abdominal pressure of 8 mm Hg for 90 minutes. Subsequently, intravital microscopy was performed to assess intrahepatic microcirculation and transaminases were measured. Serum transaminases increased 1.5-fold compared with sham controls (P < .05). Intrahepatic microcirculation was significantly disturbed immediately after pneumoperitoneum. If this is confirmed in humans, laparoscopic organ retrieval for LDLT would be expected to decrease graft quality and not be beneficial in liver transplantation.     

Clinical analysis of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after living donor liver transplantation

This study aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes and factors influencing the outcome in the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Between October, 1997 and September, 2010, 25 (16.0%) of 156 patients who had undergone LDLT for HCC experienced recurrence. All patients with recurrence, with a single exception, were in the high‐risk group. Among patients with recurrence, 76.0% of patients experienced recurrence within one yr after LDLT. One‐ and five‐yr survival rates of recurred patients were 56.0% and 8.6%, respectively. Among them, 32% of patients were treated with curative‐intent treatment, and their one‐ and five‐yr survival rates were 62.5% and 25.0%, respectively. Beyond the Milan criteria at liver transplantation (LT) (p = 0.032), multiple recurrence (p = 0.001), and palliative treatment for recurrent tumors (p = 0.049) were related to poor survival after recurrence. Additionally, the independent prognostic factors included multiple recurrence (p = 0.005) and the Milan criteria at LT (p = 0.047). Because almost all recurrent cases belonged to the high‐risk group and recurred within two yr, the high‐risk group should undergo close follow‐up for early detection and be treated with liver‐directed therapies. Although the prognosis of recurrent HCC after LDLT is poor, long‐term survival can be expected on a single recurrence and curative treatment.     

Salvage living donor liver transplantation after prior liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Salvage liver transplantation has been performed for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or deterioration of liver function after primary liver resection. Because prior liver resection per se is an unfavorable condition for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), we assessed the technical feasibility of LDLT after prior hepatectomy, and we compared the outcome of salvage LDLT with that of primary LDLT in HCC patients. Of 342 patients with HCC, 17 (5%) underwent salvage LDLT, with 5 having undergone prior major liver resection and 12 prior minor resection. During salvage LDLT, 12 patients received right lobe grafts, 3 received left lobe grafts, and 2 received dual grafts. There was 1 incident (5.9%) of perioperative mortality. Recipient operation time was not prolonged in patients undergoing salvage LDLT, but bleeding complications occurred more frequently than in patients undergoing primary LDLT. Overall survival rates after salvage LDLT were similar to those after primary LDLT, especially when the extent of recurrent tumor was within the Milan criteria. These results indicate that every combination of prior hepatectomy and living donor liver graft is feasible for patients undergoing salvage LDLT, and the acceptable extent of HCC for salvage LDLT is equivalent to that for primary LDLT.     

ABO-incompatible adult living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers timely transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). If ABO-incompatible LDLT is feasible, the need for pretransplantation treatment may be eliminated, which may reduce overall morbidity. In this article, we have described 8 adult HCC patients who successfully underwent LDLT from ABO-incompatible donors. Antirejection therapy included multiple preoperative plasmaphereses, splenectomy, and an immunosuppressive regimen with tacrolimus, methylprednisolone, and mycophenolate mofetil. The maintenance dose of immunosuppression did not differ from that of the ABO-identical cases. In addition, we also performed intrahepatic arterial infusion of prostaglandin E1. In 5 patients, we administered a single dose of rituximab, a chimeric CD20 monoclonal antibody. As a result of this treatment, 6/8 patients are still alive. Our experience has shown that it is possible to control antibody-mediated humoral rejection and other complications in adult ABO-incompatible LDLT.     

Factors affecting graft survival after living donor liver transplantation

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been considered as an alternative option to resolve the shortage of cadaveric donor organs, despite the ethical aspects of the donor procedure. The objective of this study was to analyze the risk factors affecting graft survival in LDLT. From June 1996 to December 2002, 141 patients who underwent LDLT were retrospectively analyzed. Graft survival rates were 82.5%, 80%, 77.3%, and 77.3% at 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years, respectively. The factors influencing graft survival in univariate analysis were graft-to-recipient body weight ratio (GRWR) less than 0.8% (P = .0009), intraoperative transfusion of more than six packed RBC units in addition to the use of cell saver amounts (P = .0001), left lobe grafts in adults causing small-for-size situations (P = .0135), and donor age (P = .0472). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that GRWR less than 0.8% (P = .002) and intraoperative transfusion of more than six packed RBC units (P = .014) were independent factors that decreased graft survival rates. The graft selection of greater than 0.8% of GRWR and reduction of intraoperative RBC transfusion improve graft survival.     

肝癌肝移植术后复发的危险因素及预防

原发性肝癌作为肝移植的主要适应证之一,经历了肯定、被否定和再认识的发展过程。在肝移植的起始阶段,原发性肝癌曾作为主要的适应证,但由于对适应证标准的掌握不够严格、科学,许多晚期肝癌病例进入了肝移植的适应范围,使肝移植的远期生存率降低。20世纪80年代,对肝癌的肝移植治疗由于高复发率和3年存活率不超过30%而使人气馁;20世纪90年代初期,Iwatsuki等和Bisumuth等确定了与复发相关的临床病理学危险因子并进而由Mazzafero等发展为Milan标准。尽管Milan标准在全世界范围内的采用使肝癌肝移植5年生存率已达50%以上,但肝癌肝移植的复发仍…     

肝癌肝移植术后复发机制及其防治

原发性肝癌是位列中国第二位的恶性肿瘤,全世界每年新发肝癌的一半以上在我国[1].近年来,肝移植在我国发展迅速,技术日臻成熟,肝移植亦已成为治疗肝癌的一个重要手段,目前肝癌肝移植约占我国每年开展肝移植的30%～40%,比例较国外明显偏高[2].     

Small graft for living donor liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of graft size on recipients in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to establish a clinical guideline for the minimum requirement. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although the minimum graft size required for LDLT has been reported to be 30% to 40% of graft volume (GV)/standard liver volume (SLV), the safety limit of the graft size was unknown. METHODS: A total of 33 cases of LDLT, excluding auxiliary transplantation, were reviewed with a minimum observation period of 4 months. The 33 patients were divided into three groups according to GV/SLV: medium-size graft group, small-size graft group, and extra-small graft group. The effect of GV/SLV on graft function, graft regeneration, and survival was evaluated. RESULTS: The overall patient survival rate was 94% at a mean follow-up of 15 months with a minimum observation period of 4 months. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative bilirubin clearance, alanine aminotransferase, prothrombin time, and frequency of postoperative complications among the three groups. One week after transplantation, the regeneration rate (GV at 1 week/harvested GV) in the extra-small and small groups was significantly higher than that of the medium group. The graft and patient survival rates were both 100% in the extra-small group, 75% and 88% in the small group, and 90% and 95% in the medium group. CONCLUSIONS: Small-for-size grafts less than 30% of SLV can be used with careful intraoperative and postoperative management until the grafts regenerate.     

Living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparable survival and recurrence

Several studies have reported higher rates of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). It is unclear whether this difference is due to a specific biological effect unique to the LDLT procedure or to other factors such as patient selection. We compared the overall survival (OS) rates and the rates of HCC recurrence after LDLT and DDLT at our center. Between January 1996 and September 2009, 345 patients with HCC were identified: 287 (83%) had DDLT and 58 (17%) had LDLT. The OS rates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, whereas competing risks methods were used to determine the HCC recurrence rates. The LDLT and DDLT groups were similar with respect to most clinical parameters, but they had different median waiting times (3.1 versus 5.3 months, P = 0.003) and median follow-up times (30 versus 38.1 months, P = 0.02). The type of transplant did not affect any of the measured cancer outcomes. The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were equivalent: 91.3%, 75.2%, and 75.2%, respectively, for the LDLT group and 90.5%, 79.7%, and 74.6%, respectively, for DDLT (P = 0.62). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year HCC recurrence rates were also similar: 8.8%, 10.7%, and 15.4%, respectively, for the LDLT group and 7.5%, 14.8%, and 17.0%, respectively, for the DDLT group (P = 0.54). A regression analysis identified microvascular invasion (but not the graft type) as a predictor of HCC recurrence. In conclusion, in well-matched cohorts of LDLT and DDLT recipients, LDLT and DDLT provide similarly low recurrence rates and high survival rates for the treatment of HCC.     

Prevention of hepatitis B virus recurrence after living donor liver transplantation

The emergence of lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B mutations is a major complication during pretransplantation treatment. The proper time to begin Lamivudine before transplantation is not yet known. Twenty-six patients received preoperative lamivudine treatment followed by combined lamivudine and hepatitis B immunoglobulin after transplantation up to December 2002. The length of preoperative lamivudine treatment ranged from 13 to 200 days (mean, 52 +/- 37 days). Hepatitis B virus-DNA was positive in 22 of 26 (84.6%) patients before preoperative lamivudine prophylaxis and persistently positive among only 4 of 22 patients (18%) who at transplantation did not show a viral mutation. In all patients, hepatitis B virus-DNA became negative immediately after transplantation. At a median follow-up of 34 months, neither a hepatitis B recurrence nor a mutation had occurred in any patient. The ability to schedule the proper time for preoperative lamivudine prophylaxis is an advantage of living donor liver transplantation.     

Risk factors for graft dysfunction after adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation

The aim of this study was to investigate the risk factors for graft dysfunction after adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Thirty-nine adults with chronic cirrhosis underwent LDLT between 1999 and 2004. Their postoperative courses were uneventful with no vascular or bile duct complications early after LDLT, except one mild hepatic artery stenosis. The preoperative MELD scores were significantly higher in the failed graft group (n=5) than the functioning graft group (n=34; P=.004), while the graft liver weight/standard liver volume ratio was similar between these groups. We concluded that a high preoperative MELD score was associated with postoperative graft failure and that graft size had little impact on graft outcome. Although large grafts would seem intuitively more suitable for sick recipients, we did not show a benefit among this cohort; the MELD score was the best predictor, a finding that is also most consistent with donor safety.     

Cytomegalovirus infection does not increase the risk of vanishing bile duct syndrome after liver transplantation

Abstract  Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and HLA-DR sharing have been reported to be associated with the development of vanishing bile duct syndrome (VBDS) after liver transplantation. We retrospectively analyzed the importance of these risk factors for VBDS in 126 consecutive recipients of a first transplant. In contrast to previous studies, CMV was monitored strictly using the antigenemia assay, a quantitative marker of the viral load. Patient and graft survival were comparable in patients with and without CMV infection. The incidence of VBDS was low, regardless of the CMV infection status or degree of HLA-DR sharing. Improvements in the early diagnosis and treatment of CMV infection may have eliminated its negative influence on graft survival.     

Right lobe graft in living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: For the sake of donor safety in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the left lobe is currently being used most often for the graft. However, size mismatch has been a major obstacle for an expansion of the indication for LDLT to larger-size recipients, because a left lobe graft is not safe enough for them. METHODS: In 1998, LDLT using a right lobe graft was introduced and performed on 26 recipients to overcome the small-for-size problem. The right lobe, which does not include the middle hepatic vein of the donor, was used. Initially, indication for right lobe LDLT was basically defined as an estimated left lobe graft volume/recipient body weight ratio (GRWR) of <0.8%, which was later raised to <1.0%. RESULTS: All the donors recovered from the operation without persistent complications. Two donors with transient bile leakage were successfully treated with a conservative approach. A right lobectomy resulted in more blood loss (337+/-175 ml), and a longer operative time (6.67+/-0.85 hr) than a lateral segmentectomy, but not a left lobectomy. Grafts with a GRWR >0.8% were implanted in all recipients, except for two, who received relatively smaller right lobes (GRWR of 0.68% and 0.66%). In one of these two, the right lobe from the donor was used as the orthotopic auxiliary graft. Postoperative transitory increases in total bilirubin and aspartate transaminoferase for right lobe donors were higher than those for the left lateral segmentectomy. Nineteen recipients (73.1%) were successfully treated with this procedure. The causes of death were not specific for right lobe LDLT, except for one patient with a graft that had multiple hepatic venous orifices. These multiple and separate anastomoses of the hepatic veins caused an outflow block as a result of a positional shift of the graft, which finally led to graft loss. CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that right lobe grafting is a safe and effective procedure, resulting in the expansion of the indication for LDLT to large-size recipients. How to deal with the possible variation in the anatomy of the right lobe graft should be given attention throughout the procedure.