Fates of retained hepatic segment IV and its prognostic impact in adult split liver transplantation using an extended right liver graft

Purpose@#When splitting a liver for adult and pediatric graft recipients, the retained left medial section (S4) will undergo ischemic necrosis and the right trisection graft becomes an extended right liver (ERL) graft. We investigated the fates of the retained S4 and its prognostic impact in adult split liver transplantation (SLT) using an ERL graft. @*Methods@#This was a retrospective analysis of 25 adult SLT recipients who received split ERL grafts. @*Results@#The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 27.3 ± 10.9 and graft-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 1.98 ± 0.44. The mean donor age was 26.5 ± 7.7 years. The split ERL graft weight was 1,181.5 ± 252.8 g, which resulted in a mean GRWR of 1.98 ± 0.44. Computed tomography of the retained S4 parenchyma revealed small ischemic necrosis in 16 patients (64.0%) and large ischemic necrosis in the remaining 9 patients (36.0%). No S4-associated biliary complications were developed. The mean GRWR was 1.87 ± 0.43 in the 9 patients with large ischemic necrosis and 2.10 ± 0.44 in the 15 cases with small ischemic necrosis (P = 0.283). The retained S4 parenchyma showed gradual atrophy on follow-up imaging studies. The amount of S4 ischemic necrosis was not associated with graft (P = 0.592) or patient (P = 0.243) survival. A MELD score of >30 and pretransplant ventilator support were associated with inferior outcomes. @*Conclusion@#The amount of S4 ischemic necrosis is not a prognostic factor in adult SLT recipients, probably due to a sufficiently large GRWR.

Fates of retained hepatic segment IV and its prognostic impact in adult split liver transplantation using an extended right liver graft

Purpose@#When splitting a liver for adult and pediatric graft recipients, the retained left medial section (S4) will undergo ischemic necrosis and the right trisection graft becomes an extended right liver (ERL) graft. We investigated the fates of the retained S4 and its prognostic impact in adult split liver transplantation (SLT) using an ERL graft. @*Methods@#This was a retrospective analysis of 25 adult SLT recipients who received split ERL grafts. @*Results@#The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 27.3 ± 10.9 and graft-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) was 1.98 ± 0.44. The mean donor age was 26.5 ± 7.7 years. The split ERL graft weight was 1,181.5 ± 252.8 g, which resulted in a mean GRWR of 1.98 ± 0.44. Computed tomography of the retained S4 parenchyma revealed small ischemic necrosis in 16 patients (64.0%) and large ischemic necrosis in the remaining 9 patients (36.0%). No S4-associated biliary complications were developed. The mean GRWR was 1.87 ± 0.43 in the 9 patients with large ischemic necrosis and 2.10 ± 0.44 in the 15 cases with small ischemic necrosis (P = 0.283). The retained S4 parenchyma showed gradual atrophy on follow-up imaging studies. The amount of S4 ischemic necrosis was not associated with graft (P = 0.592) or patient (P = 0.243) survival. A MELD score of >30 and pretransplant ventilator support were associated with inferior outcomes. @*Conclusion@#The amount of S4 ischemic necrosis is not a prognostic factor in adult SLT recipients, probably due to a sufficiently large GRWR.

Is renal replacement therapy necessary in deceased donor liver transplantation candidates with hepatorenal syndrome?: a 2-year experience at a high-volume center

PURPOSE: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a fatal complication in patients with end-stage liver disease awaiting liver transplantation (LT). HRS often develops in patients with high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. This study investigated the outcomes of peritransplant management of HRS in a high-volume LT center in Korea for 2 years.METHODS: A total of 157 recipients that deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) from January 2017 to December 2018 were included. In-hospital mortality (IHM) was analyzed in relation to pre- and posttransplant application of renal replacement therapy (RRT).RESULTS: Primary diagnoses for DDLT were alcoholic liver disease (n = 61), HBV-associated liver cirrhosis (n = 48), retransplantation for chronic graft failure (n = 24), and others (n = 24). Mean MELD score was 34.6 ± 6.2 with 72 patients at Korean Network for Organ Sharing MELD status 2 (45.9%), 43 at status 3 (27.4%), 36 at status 4 (22.9%), and 6 at status 5 (3.8%). Pretransplant RRT was performed in 16 patients (10.2%) that did not show IHM. Posttransplant RRT was performed in 69 patients (44.0%), for whom IHM incidence was 15.9%. In 53 patients that had undergone de novo posttransplant RRT, IHM incidence increased to 20.8%. IHM in the 88 patients not requiring RRT was 2.3%.CONCLUSION: The majority of adult DDLT recipients in Korean MELD score-based allocation system have very high MELD scores, which is often associated with HRS. Pretransplant RRT appears to improve posttransplant survival outcomes. We thereby recommend that, if indicated, pretransplant RRT be performed while awaiting DDLT.

Pretransplant Hepatic Malignancy Increases Risk of De Novo Malignancy after Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence and development of de novo malignancy (DNM) after liver transplantation (LT) are the major causes of late recipient death.METHODS: We analyzed the incidence of extrahepatic DNM following living donor LT according to the status of pretransplant hepatic malignancy. We selected 2,076 adult patients who underwent primary LDLT during 7 years from January 2010 to December 2016.RESULTS: The pretransplant hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,012) showed 45 cases (4.4%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in 10; lung cancer in 10; stomach cancer in 6; colorectal cancer in 5; urinary bladder cancer in 3; and other cancers in 11. The pretransplant no hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,064) showed 25 cases (2.3%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: colorectal cancer in 3; stomach cancer in 3; leukemia in 3; lung cancer in 3; PTLD in 2; prostate cancer in 2; and other cancers in 9. Incidences of extrahepatic DNM in the pretransplant hepatic malignancy and no hepatic malignancy groups were as follows: 1.1% and 0.5% at 1 year, 3.2% and 2.0% at 3 years, 4.6% and 2.5% at 5 years, and 5.4% and 2.8% at 8 years, respectively (P = 0.006). Their overall patient survival rates were as follows: 97.3% and 97.2% at 1 year, 91.6% and 95.9% at 3 years, 89.8% and 95.4% at 5 years, and 89.2% and 95.4% at 8 years, respectively (P < 0.001). Pretransplant hepatic malignancy was the only significant risk factor for posttransplant extrahepatic DNM.CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that patients who had pretransplant hepatic malignancy be followed up more strictly because they have a potential risk of primary hepatic malignancy recurrence as well as a higher risk of extrahepatic DNM than patients without pretransplant hepatic malignancy.

Pretransplant Hepatic Malignancy Increases Risk of De Novo Malignancy after Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND@#Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence and development of de novo malignancy (DNM) after liver transplantation (LT) are the major causes of late recipient death.@*METHODS@#We analyzed the incidence of extrahepatic DNM following living donor LT according to the status of pretransplant hepatic malignancy. We selected 2,076 adult patients who underwent primary LDLT during 7 years from January 2010 to December 2016.@*RESULTS@#The pretransplant hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,012) showed 45 cases (4.4%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in 10; lung cancer in 10; stomach cancer in 6; colorectal cancer in 5; urinary bladder cancer in 3; and other cancers in 11. The pretransplant no hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,064) showed 25 cases (2.3%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: colorectal cancer in 3; stomach cancer in 3; leukemia in 3; lung cancer in 3; PTLD in 2; prostate cancer in 2; and other cancers in 9. Incidences of extrahepatic DNM in the pretransplant hepatic malignancy and no hepatic malignancy groups were as follows: 1.1% and 0.5% at 1 year, 3.2% and 2.0% at 3 years, 4.6% and 2.5% at 5 years, and 5.4% and 2.8% at 8 years, respectively (P = 0.006). Their overall patient survival rates were as follows: 97.3% and 97.2% at 1 year, 91.6% and 95.9% at 3 years, 89.8% and 95.4% at 5 years, and 89.2% and 95.4% at 8 years, respectively (P < 0.001). Pretransplant hepatic malignancy was the only significant risk factor for posttransplant extrahepatic DNM.@*CONCLUSION@#Our results suggest that patients who had pretransplant hepatic malignancy be followed up more strictly because they have a potential risk of primary hepatic malignancy recurrence as well as a higher risk of extrahepatic DNM than patients without pretransplant hepatic malignancy.

Pretransplant Hepatic Malignancy Increases Risk of De Novo Malignancy after Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND@#Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence and development of de novo malignancy (DNM) after liver transplantation (LT) are the major causes of late recipient death.@*METHODS@#We analyzed the incidence of extrahepatic DNM following living donor LT according to the status of pretransplant hepatic malignancy. We selected 2,076 adult patients who underwent primary LDLT during 7 years from January 2010 to December 2016.@*RESULTS@#The pretransplant hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,012) showed 45 cases (4.4%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in 10; lung cancer in 10; stomach cancer in 6; colorectal cancer in 5; urinary bladder cancer in 3; and other cancers in 11. The pretransplant no hepatic malignancy group (n = 1,064) showed 25 cases (2.3%) of the following extrahepatic DNMs: colorectal cancer in 3; stomach cancer in 3; leukemia in 3; lung cancer in 3; PTLD in 2; prostate cancer in 2; and other cancers in 9. Incidences of extrahepatic DNM in the pretransplant hepatic malignancy and no hepatic malignancy groups were as follows: 1.1% and 0.5% at 1 year, 3.2% and 2.0% at 3 years, 4.6% and 2.5% at 5 years, and 5.4% and 2.8% at 8 years, respectively (P = 0.006). Their overall patient survival rates were as follows: 97.3% and 97.2% at 1 year, 91.6% and 95.9% at 3 years, 89.8% and 95.4% at 5 years, and 89.2% and 95.4% at 8 years, respectively (P < 0.001). Pretransplant hepatic malignancy was the only significant risk factor for posttransplant extrahepatic DNM.@*CONCLUSION@#Our results suggest that patients who had pretransplant hepatic malignancy be followed up more strictly because they have a potential risk of primary hepatic malignancy recurrence as well as a higher risk of extrahepatic DNM than patients without pretransplant hepatic malignancy.

Spontaneous rupture of intrahepatic bile duct following portal vein embolization in a patient with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a case of successful curative resection

We herein present a case of spontaneous rupture of intrahepatic bile duct in a patient with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, which were successfully treated by curative resection. A 60-year-old male patient with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma was decompressed with single percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Two days after right portal vein embolization, the patient suffered from paralytic ileus with marked abdominal distension. Imaging study revealed that marked fluid collection around the liver and whole abdomen, suggesting intrahepatic bile duct rupture. With abdominal drainage and biliary decompression for 2 weeks, the biliary rupture was controlled. To enhance the safety of right hepatectomy, additional right hepatic vein embolization was performed. The patient underwent routine surgical procedures for right hepatectomy, caudate lobectomy and bile duct resection, and recovered uneventfully and discharged 18 days after surgery. This is the first report of a case of spontaneous rupture of intrahepatic bile duct in a patient with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.