Pre-operative assessment of living liver donors' liver anatomy and volumes.

Decades of experience supports LDLT as a favorable strategy to reduce waitlist mortality. The multiple regenerative pathways of hepatocytes and other hepatic cells justify the rationale behind it. Nonetheless, living liver donation is still underused and its broader implementation is challenging, mostly due to variability in practices leading to concerns related to donor safety. A non-systematic literature search was conducted for peer-reviewed original articles related to pre-operative evaluation of living liver donor candidates. Eligible studies were synthesized upon consensus for discussion in this up-to-date review. Review of the literature demonstrate that the importance of preoperative assessment of vascular, biliary and liver volume to ensure donor safety and adequate surgical planning for graft procurement is widely recognized. Moreover, data indicates that anatomic variants in vascular and biliary systems in healthy donors are common, present in up to 50% of the population. Therefore, comprehensive mapping and visualizations of each component is needed. Different imaging modalities are reported across practices and are discussed in detail. Lastly, assessment of liver volume must take into account several technical and donor factors that increase the chances of errors in volume estimation, which occurs in up to 10% of the cases. Experience suggests that maximizing donor safety and lessening their risks is a result of integrated experience between hepatobiliary and transplant surgery, along with multidisciplinary efforts in performing a comprehensive pre-operative donor assessment. Although technical advances have increased the accuracy of volume estimation, over- or under-estimation remains a challenge that needs further attention.

Surgical approach to achieve R0 resections in primary and metastatic liver tumors: a literature review.

Background and Objective: Primary and metastatic liver tumors are a significant cause of mortality worldwide. Regardless of the etiology of the tumor, macro- and microscopically clear margins (R0) while preserving adequate function of the remaining organ are the main goals after liver resections. However, technically challenging procedures are required to achieve R0 resection. Currently, there is no consensus of which should be the ideal minimal safety margin for liver tumor resections, with contrasting reports in regards of safety, tumor recurrence and overall outcomes following R0. Therefore, we aim to review current worldwide surgical practices to achieve R0 resections for primary and metastatic liver tumors in challenging surgical techniques and their reported outcomes. Methods: PubMed database, Google Scholar, and OVID Medline were searched for peer-reviewed original articles related to surgical techniques performed to achieve R0 resections in the setting of primary and/or metastatic liver tumors. An up-to-date review of English-language articles published between 2015 to July 2022 was performed. Key Content and Findings: Primary and metastatic liver tumors can be effectively treated using hepatic resection. Current literature highlights that tumors involving major vascular structures are not uncommon. Surgical advances have allowed for vascular control techniques, as well as vascular resections to be performed in a feasible and safe manner to achieve R0 resections. Complex resections combining surgical techniques can be performed in certain population after a detailed evaluation. Liver transplantation (LT) have been used with varying degrees of success for treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), non-resectable CRLM and metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Conclusions: Safety and feasibility of R0 resections have been reported for multiple techniques. Technical complexity should not be a limitation to achieve or pursue R0 tumor resection. However, there has to be a balance between patient risk/benefit in attempting R0 resections. Adequate training of surgeons on implementation of complex techniques, as well as transplant oncology techniques applied to hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery represents as a promising path to improve short and long-term outcomes for liver-related oncology patients.

Technical Aspects and Considerations of Meso-Rex Bypass Following Liver Transplantation With Left Lateral Segment Grafts: Case Report and Review of the Literature.

In pediatric patients with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction and complications of portal hypertension, but with normal liver function, a meso-Rex bypass (MRB) connecting the superior mesenteric vein to the intrahepatic left portal is the favored surgical management. Pediatric patients with a history of a partial liver transplant (LT), especially living donors, are at greater risk for portal vein complications. Hence, an adequate knowledge of this technique and its additional challenges in the post-LT patient setting is crucial. We provide an overview of the available literature on technical aspects for an MRB post-LT. Preoperative considerations are highlighted, along with intraoperative considerations and postoperative management. Special attention is given to the even-more-demanding aspect of performing an MRB post-liver transplantation with a left lateral segment. Surgical alternatives are also discussed. In addition, we report here a unique case in which this surgical technique was performed on a complex pediatric patient with a history of a living-donor LT with a left lateral segment graft over a decade ago.

Early removal of drains and lines after liver transplantation to reduce the length of hospital stay and enhance recovery - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The timing of removing abdominal drains, central venous catheters (CVC), and urinary catheters (UC) on post liver transplantation (LT) outcomes is not well elucidated. OBJECTIVES: To provide international expert panel recommendations and guidelines on time of drain and catheter removal as a part of an ERAS protocol to reduce the length of hospital stay and enhance recovery. METHODS: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Papers considered were those reporting one or more outcomes of interest related to drainage and line removal in the setting of LT. POSPERO Protocol ID: CRD42021238349 RESULTS: On analyzing five relevant studies pertaining to drains in patients undergoing LT (four retrospectives and one prospective), the length of hospital and/or ICU stay was similar or shorter, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were lower in those without drains. No studies pertaining specifically to the time of removal of drains, CVC's, or UC's in LT were found. Studies in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery or hepatectomies recommend early removal of CVC and UC to reduce catheter-associated infections. CONCLUSIONS: Based more on expert recommendation, we propose that abdominal drains, if placed during LT, should be removed by postoperative day 5 after LT, based on quantity and fluid characteristics (Quality of Evidence; Low to Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Larger studies are needed to more reliably determine indications for early drain and line removal in an ERAS protocol setting.

Liver Transplantation With Grafts From Super Obese Donors.

There are limited data on liver transplant (LT) outcomes with grafts from super obese donors. The present study aims to evaluate a unique cohort of recipients following LT using grafts from donors with body mass index (BMI) ≥50. METHODS: Patients receiving grafts from donors with BMI ≥50 and BMI <50 from 2010 to 2019 were identified. A 1:2 case-control match was conducted to compare outcomes between the groups. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-five adult LTs were performed in the study period. Eighteen patients receiving a graft from a donor with BMI ≥50 were identified and matched to 36 patients receiving a graft from a donor with BMI <50. Grafts from male donors were significantly lower in the donor BMI ≥50 group when compared with the donor BMI <50 group (16.7% versus 66.7%, P = 0.001). Liver biopsy was performed in 77.8% of grafts in the donor BMI ≥50 group, whereas only in 38.8% of the grafts in the donor BMI <50 group (P = 0.007). Recipients in the donor BMI ≥50 group had a significantly higher diagnosis rate of hepatocellular carcinoma pretransplant versus the donor BMI <50 group (38.9% versus 8.3%, respectively; P = 0.006). Major complications within 30 d did not differ statistically between groups. Biliary complications within the first 30 d were equal among groups (16.7%). Subanalysis comparing the super obese donor group versus the nonobese donor group showed no differences in terms of postoperative complications, readmission rate, graft rejection, or major complications including the need for reoperation, retransplantation, or mortality. Graft and patient survival at 1-, 3-, and 5-y graft were similar between the donor BMI ≥50 group versus donor BMI <50 group (94%/89%/89% versus 88%/88%/88%, P = 0.89, and 94%/94%/94% versus 88%/88%/88%, P = 0.48, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: LT with carefully selected grafts from super obese donors can be safely performed with outcomes comparable with non-super obese donor livers. Therefore, these types of grafts could represent a safe means to expand the donor pool.