Implementation of an ERAS protocol on cirrhotic patients in liver resection: a cohort study.

The development of laparoscopic liver surgery, the improvement in the perioperative care programs, and the surgical innovation have allowed liver resections on selected cirrhotic patients. However, the great majority of ERAS studies for liver surgery have been conducted on patients with normal liver parenchyma, while its application on cirrhotic patients is limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS protocol in cirrhotic patients who underwent liver surgery. We present an analytical observational prospective cohort study, which included all adult patients who underwent a liver resection between December 2017 and December 2019 with an ERAS program. We compare the outcomes in patients cirrhotic (CG)/non-cirrhotic (NCG). A total of 101 patients were included. Thirty of these (29.7%) were patients ≥ 70 cirrhotic. 87% of the both groups had performed > 70% of the ERAS. Oral diet tolerance and mobilization on the first postoperative day were similar in both groups. The hospital stay was similar in both groups (2.9 days/2.99 days). Morbidity and mortality were similar; Clavien I-II (CG: 44% vs NCG: 30%) and Clavien ≥ III (CG: 3% vs NCG: 8%). Hospital re-entry was higher in the NCG. Overall mortality of the study was 1%. ERAS protocol compliance was associated with a decrease in complications (ERAS < 70%: 80% vs ERAS > 90%: 20%; p: 0.02) and decrease in severity of complications in both study groups. The application of the ERAS program in cirrhotic patients who undergo liver surgery is feasible, safe, and reproducible. It allows postoperative complications, mortality, hospital stay, and readmission rates comparable to those in standard patients.

Recipient With Influenza A Infection: Contraindication to Transplant? A Case Report.

Active infections in recipients are considered an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation due to the risk of severe disease caused by the required immunosuppression. Even though viral infections, such as Influenza A, have been treated in liver transplant patients both in the immediate and late postoperative period with favorable outcomes, no cases of prediagnosed Influenza A have been described in which the decision to proceed with the indication had to be made. In certain viral infections, like Influenza A, the paucisymptomatic state and the availability of appropriate treatment could open the door to performing liver transplants with positive results.

Liver Transplant With Double Portal Anastomose: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Reno-portal reconstruction is a surgical alternative to achieve enough portal flow in liver transplant when there is a complete portal thrombosis, provided there are collaterals or portosystemic shunt, with or without spleno-renal shunt. METHODS: We present the case of a 58-year-old man with enolic cirrhosis and a history of gastrointestinal hemorrhage due to esophageal varices and portal thrombosis. The clinical case was discussed in the Transplant Committee, and the patient was included in the surgical waiting list with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score of 17 and Child-Pugh score of A6. The preoperative computer tomography scan showed significant collateral circulation with esophageal varices, varices dependent on the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) and hypoplasic portal vein. During the operation, a large shunt from the IMV to the iliac territory and type II portal thrombosis were observed, which was managed with eversion thrombectomy. A temporary portocaval shunt was performed, showing minimal flow in the portal vein, which did not improve after ligation of the systemic shunt. It was decided to perform a reno-portal anastomosis, after which the portal flow measurement was 600 cc per minute; because of this, it was decided to supplement portal flow with an end-to-side portoportal anastomosis, obtaining a flow of 1300 cc per minute with low resistance (R0.5). RESULTS: The postoperative period was favorable, with good evolution of liver analytical parameters, with permeability of the porto-portal venous anastomoses, reno-portal, arterial, and suprahepatic anastomoses in the imaging tests. CONCLUSION: If the portal flow is insufficient with a hypoplasic portal vein, a double anastomosis, portoportal, and reno-portal would be a technical resource.

Liver Trauma: Until When We Have to Delay Surgery? A Review.

Liver involvement after abdominal blunt trauma must be expected, and in up to 30% of cases, spleen, kidney, and pancreas injuries may coexist. Whenever hemodynamics conditions do not contraindicate the overcoming of the ancient dogma according to which exploratory laparotomy should be performed after every major abdominal trauma, a CT scan has to clarify the liver lesions so as to determine the optimal management strategy. Except for complete vascular avulsion, no liver trauma grade precludes nonoperative management. Every attempt to treat the injured liver by avoiding a strong surgical approach may be considered. Each time, a nonoperative management (NOM) consisting of a basic "wait and see" attitude combined with systemic support and blood replacement are inadequate. Embolization should be considered to stop the bleeding. Percutaneous drainage of collections, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with papilla sphincterotomy or stent placement and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) may avoid, or at least delay, surgical reconstruction or resection until systemic and hepatic inflammatory remodeling are resolved. The pathophysiological principle sustaining these leanings is based on the opportunity to limit the further release of cell debris fragments acting as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and the following stress response associated with the consequent immune suppression after trauma. The main goal will be a faster recovery combined with limited cell death of the liver through the ischemic events that may directly follow the trauma, exacerbated by hemostatic procedures and surgery, in order to reduce the gross distortion of a regenerated liver.

Improving Matching Between Recipient and Donor in Liver Transplantation: Are Scores Able to Predict Long-term Survival?

BACKGROUND: The primary goal was to calculate the value of delta Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (D-MELD) and Balance of Risk (BAR) scores in patients who underwent liver transplant. The secondary objective was to evaluate D-MELD and BAR scores' ability to predict patient and graft survival. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 336 patients who underwent liver transplant in a tertiary medical center between January 2010 and December 2020. The D-MELD and the BAR scores were evaluated through a receiver operating characteristic curve with the calculation of area under the curve (AUC) to evaluate the predictive score power for 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 5-year patient and graft survivals. RESULTS: The AUCs of D-MELD score in predicting 5-year patient and graft survival were 0.506 (95% CI, 0.43-0.57) and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.42-0.56), respectively. The AUCs of BAR score in predicting 5-year patient and graft survival were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.33-0.66) and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.30-0.67), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We could not confirm the ability to predict long-term survival by using D-MELD and BAR scores in our sample; however, there is a statistically significant trend in receiver operating characteristic curves of 5-year patient and graft survivals. We encourage the use of new scoring systems with a greater external validation to improve allograft allocation.