Robotic living donor hepatectomy is associated with superior outcomes for both the donor and the recipient compared with laparoscopic or open - A single-center prospective registry study of 3448 cases.

Minimally invasive donor hepatectomy is an emerging surgical technique in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We examined outcomes across open, laparoscopic, and robotic LDLT using a prospective registry. We analyzed 3448 cases (1724 donor-recipient pairs) from January 2011 to March 2023 (NCT06062706). Among donors, 520 (30%) were female. Adult-to-adult LDLT comprised 1061 (62%) cases. A total of 646 (37%) of the donors underwent open, 165 (10%) laparoscopic, and 913 (53%) robotic hepatectomies. Primary outcomes: donor overall morbidity was 4% (35/903) for robotic, 8% (13/165) laparoscopic, and 16% (106/646) open (P < .001) procedures. Pediatric and adult recipient mortality was similar among the 3 donor hepatectomy approaches: robotic 1.5% and 7.0%, compared with 2.3% and 8.3% laparoscopic, and 1.6% and 5.5% for open donor surgery, respectively (P = .802, P = .564). Secondary outcomes: pediatric and adult recipients major morbidity after robotic hepatectomy was 15% and 23%, compared with 25% and 44% for laparoscopic surgery and 19% and 31% for open surgery, respectively (P = .033, P < .001). Graft and recipient 5-year survival were 90% and 93% for pediatrics and 79% and 80% for adults, respectively. In conclusion, robotic LDLT was associated with superior outcomes when compared with the laparoscopic and open approaches. Both donors and, for the first time reported, recipients benefitted from lower morbidity rates in robotic surgery, emphasizing its potential for further advancing this field.

Robotic surgery and liver transplantation: A single-center experience of 501 robotic donor hepatectomies.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades robotic surgery has been introduced to many areas including liver surgery. Laparoscopic liver surgery is an alternative minimally invasive approach. However, moving on to the complexity of living donor hepatectomies, the advantages of robotic versus laparoscopic approach have convinced us to establish the robotic platform as a standard for living donor hepatectomy. METHODS: From November 2018 to January 2022, 501 fully robotic donor hepatectomies, including 177 left lateral donor lobes, 112 full left lobes and 212 full right lobes were performed. Grafts were donated to 296 adult recipients and 205 pediatric recipients. Donor age, sex, body weight, body mass index (BMI), graft weight, graft to body weight ratio (GBWR), operative time, blood loss, first warm ischemic time, pain score, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and hospital stay, and complications were retrospectively analyzed based on a prospectively kept database. Recipients were evaluated for graft and patient survival, age, sex, BMI, body weight, model of end-stage liver disease score, blood loss, transfusions, operative time, cold ischemic time, length of hospital stay and complications. RESULTS: There was no donor mortality. Two cases needed to be converted to open surgery. The median blood loss was 60 mL (range 20-800), median donor operative time was 6.77 h (range 2.93-11.53), median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range 2-22). Complication rate in donors classified following Clavien-Dindo was 6.4% (n = 32) with one grade III complication. Three-year actual recipient overall survival was 91.4%; 87.5% for adult recipients and 97.1% for pediatric recipients. Three-year actual graft overall survival was 90.6%; 87.5% for adult recipients and 95.1% for pediatric recipients. In-hospital mortality was 6%, 9.1% (27/296) for adult recipients and 1.4% (3/205) for pediatric recipients. The recipients' morbidity was 19.8% (n = 99). Twenty-eight recipients (5.6%) had biliary and 22 (4.4%) vascular complications. Six (12.0%) recipients needed to be re-transplanted. CONCLUSIONS: With growing experience it is nowadays possible to perform any donor hepatectomy by robotic approach regardless of anatomical variations and graft size. Donor morbidity and quality for life results are encouraging and should motivate other transplant centers with interest in minimally invasive donor surgery to adopt this robotic technique.

Large for size in pediatrics liver transplant using left lateral segment grafts: A single center experience.

BACKGROUND: There are still controversies in using the large left lateral segment in pediatrics LT, with the possibility of the problem of LFS grafts, and the use of monosegmental or reduced liver grafts in small infants. This study aimed to evaluate our experience with LFSG in pediatrics LT. METHODS: A cohort retrospective analysis was conducted including pediatric recipients who underwent LT between January 2011 and October 2019. We compared recipients with GRWR ≥ 4% (LFS) vs GRWR < 4% as an average for size grafts. RESULTS: There were 331 pediatric LT, 74 patients with GRWR ≥ 4%, and 257 patients with GRWR < 4%. In the group of LFS grafts, temporary abdominal closure by silicon patch was done in 39 patients (52.7%), 2 patients (2.7%) had postoperative HAT, 3 patients (4.1%) early PVT, 1 patient (1.3%) bile leak, and 3 patients (4.1%) had wound infection, with no significant difference in these complications between the 2 groups. In patients with LFS- grafts, the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-year patients survival rates were 94.6%, 91.7%, 91.7%, and 91.7%, respectively, while the survival rates in patients of the other group were 96.1%, 92.6%, 91.9%, and 91.9%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = .85). CONCLUSION: Using LFS graft by left lateral segment in pediatric LT with potential delayed abdominal closure is a safe and feasible option with good outcomes and unnecessary need for graft reduction if performed by an experienced multidisciplinary team.

Safety and Feasibility Report of Robotic-assisted Left Lateral Sectionectomy for Pediatric Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Comparative Analysis of Learning Curves and Mastery Achieved With the Laparoscopic Approach.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in left lateral sectionectomy for donor hepatectomy. No data are available concerning the safety of the robotic (ROB) approach. METHODS: A retrospective comparative study was conducted on 75 consecutive minimally invasive donor hepatectomies. The first 25 ROB procedures performed from November 2018 to July 2019 were compared with our first (LAP1) and last 25 (LAP2) laparoscopic cases performed between May 2013 and October 2018. Short-term donors and recipients' outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: No conversions were noticed in ROB whereas 2 conversions (8%) were recorded in LAP1 and none in LAP2. Blood loss was significantly less in ROB compared with LAP1 (P ≤ 0.001) but not in LAP2. Warm ischemia time was longer in ROB (P ≤ 0.001) with respect to the other groups. Operative time was similar in the 3 groups (P = 0.080); however, the hospital stay was shorter in ROB (P = 0.048). The trend in operative time in ROB was significantly shorter compared to LAP1 and LAP2: linear R2 0.478, P≤0.001; R2 0.012, P = 0.596; R3 0.004, P = 0.772, respectively. Donor morbidity was nihil in ROB, similar in LAP1 and LAP2 (n=3%-12%; P = 0.196). ROB procedures required less postoperative analgesia (P = 0.002). Recipient complications were similar for all groups (P = 0.274), and no early retransplantations were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic left lateral sectionectomy for donor hepatectomy is a safe procedure with results comparable to the laparoscopy in terms of donor morbidity and overall recipients' outcome when the procedure is performed by experts. Certainly, its use is currently very limited.

Robotic Versus Open Right Lobe Donor Hepatectomy for Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Robotic right lobe donor hepatectomy (RRLDH) is rarely performed, and data concerning its safety and efficacy are lacking. Here we compare our series of RRLDHs with a similar cohort undergoing open right lobe donor hepatectomy (ORLDH) with a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. Among 263 consecutive adult patients undergoing right lobe living donor hepatectomy from January 2015 until July 2019, 35 RRLDHs were matched to 70 ORLDHs. A 1:2 PSM analysis was performed to make the groups comparable for donor sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) and for recipient sex, age, BMI, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and indication for transplant. Operative time was longer in RRLDHs compared with ORLDHs (504 ± 73.5 versus 331 ± 65.1 minutes; P < 0.001) but significantly decreased with the number of patients (P < 0.001). No conversions occurred. First warm ischemia time was longer and blood loss significantly less in RRLDHs (P = 0.001 and 0.003, respectively). Overall donor complications were similar: 2 (6%) in RRLDHs versus 12 (17%) in ORLDHs (P = 0.13). Biliary leak occurred in 1 (3%) patient receiving a robotic procedure and 2 (3%) patients receiving the conventional approach. Donors undergoing robotic surgery required less patient-controlled analgesia and had a shorter hospital stay compared with the open surgery group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). No significant differences in graft anatomical data and recipient outcomes were recorded. RRLDH is feasible, safe, and reproducible, with significantly decreased blood loss and a shorter hospital stay compared with the open procedure. The first 35 patients receiving the robotic procedure showed a substantial reduction in operative time, reflecting a rapid shortening of the learning curve.

Is It Justified to Use Liver Grafts From Living Donors for Retransplant? A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Liver retransplant is considered the only hope for patients with irreversible graft failure after primary transplant. In most Western centers, retransplantis done mainly from deceased donors; so far, only few published studies have reported on outcomes of liver retransplant with living donors. In this study, our aim was to analyze the outcomes of living-donor liver retransplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent liver retransplant between February 2011 and February 2019 were included in the study. Preoperative, operative, and postoperative data were analyzed. Results from 2 patient groups were compared: liver retransplant with living donors and liver retransplant with deceased donors. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients underwent liver retransplant (21 adult and 11 pediatric patients). The most common indications for liver retransplant were hepatic artery thrombosis (28.5%) and primary graft nonfunction (23.8%) in adults and hepatic artery thrombosis (45.5%) and chronic rejection (36.4%) in pediatric patients. Seventeen retransplant patients (53.1%) required early retransplant (within 1 mo), mainly due to hepatic artery thrombosis (52.9%) and primary graft nonfunction (35.3%). Late retransplant was mainly due to chronic rejection (40%) and recurrence of primary disease (26.7%). Seventeen patients (53.1%) underwent living-donor retransplant, and 5 donors underwent robotic right hepatectomy. Graft and patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 81.3% for living-donor and 51.4% for deceased-donor liver retransplant recipients (P = .08). On multivariate analyses, we observed significant differences between both groups in pretransplant Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease scores (P = .05), preoperative international normalized ratio (P = .012), and cold ischemia time (P = .046). CONCLUSIONS: The use of living donors for liver retransplant, despite its technical demand, was shown to be a safe and feasible option, especially when there is scarcity of deceased donors.

Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Left Lateral Sectionectomy in Pediatric Transplantation: A Propensity Score Analysis on 220 Consecutive Patients.

Left lateral sectionectomy for donor hepatectomy is a well-established alternative to deceased donor pediatric liver transplantation. However, very little is available on the laparoscopic approach (laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy [L-LLS]). With the aim to assess safety, reproducibility under proctorship, and outcomes following living donor liver transplantation in children, a comparative single-center series using propensity score matching (PSM) to evaluate open left lateral sectionectomy (O-LLS) versus L-LLS was carried out in a relatively short time period in a high-volume pediatric transplant center. A retrospective, observational, single-center, PSM study was conducted on 220 consecutive living donor hepatectomies from January 2011 to April 2017. The variables considered for PSM were as follows: year of operation, recipient age, indication for transplant, recipient weight, donor sex, donor age, and donor body mass index. After matching, 72 O-LLSs were fit to be compared with 72 L-LLSs. Operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly longer in L-LLSs, whereas blood loss and overall donor complication rates were significantly lower. Postoperative day 1 and 4 pain scores were significantly less in the L-LLS group (P = 0.015 and 0.003, respectively). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in L-LLS (4.6 versus 4.1 days; P = 0.014). Overall donor biliary complications were 9 (12.5%) and 1 (1.4%) for O-LLS and L-LLS (P = 0.022), respectively. Vascular complications occurred in 3 (4.2%) children without graft loss in the laparoscopic group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall patient survival rates were 98.5%, 90.9%, and 90.9% in the O-LLS group and in the L-LLS group 94.3%, 92.7%, and 86.8% (P = 0.28). In conclusion, L-LLS for donor hepatectomy is a safe and reproducible technique yielding better donor perioperative outcomes with respect to the conventional approach with similar recipient outcomes.

Effect of Downstaging and Bridging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Survival Following Liver Transplant: A Single Center Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Hepatocellular carcinoma is among the leading causes of cancer death. The Milan criteria are the first and most widely used criteria for selecting patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for a good transplant outcome. Studies have shown that patients with hepatocellular carcinoma outside the Milan criteria have good outcomes if they are successfully downstaged before transplant. We report our experience with locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, either for bridging or for downstaging prior to transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic charts and our institutional database for adult patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma between 2001 and 2016. We recorded patient demographics, the type of transplant (living donor or deceased donor), radiologic findings, the type of locoregional intervention, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 642 adult liver transplants were performed during the study period (290 living donor and 352 deceased donor), of which 158 (24.6%) were conducted in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (104 men and 54 women). Hepatocellular carcinoma was associated with hepatitis C in 80 patients (51%), hepatitis B in 44 (28%), and was cryptogenic in 13 (8%). Patients were grouped based on their radiologic staging (within Milan, within and beyond University of California, San Francisco), and subsequently described by whether they received locoregional therapy. Median survival and mortality were noted. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed no statistically significant difference for patients within the Milan criteria, with or without locoregional therapy (P = .5). When patients within the Milan criteria were combined with patients within the University of California, San Francisco criteria, those who were downstaged from outside the latter criteria had similar survival. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that carefully selected patients beyond the Milan criteria and even beyond the University of California, San Francisco criteria can be bridged and downstaged successfully for liver transplant.

Velopharyngeal changes after maxillary distraction in cleft patients using a rigid external distraction device: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate early and late velopharyngeal changes in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients after use of the Rigid External Distractor (RED) device and to correlate these changes to the amount of maxillary advancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty Class III CLP patients were included in the study. Maxillary advancement was performed using the RED device in combination with titanium miniplates and screws for anchorage. Lateral cephalograms, nasometer, and nasopharyngoscope records were taken before distraction, immediately after distraction, and 1 year after distraction. A paired t-test was used to detect differences at P < .05. RESULTS: SNA angle and A point and ANS to Y axis were significantly increased after maxillary distraction (P  =  .0001). Statistically significant increases in nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal depths, velar angle, and need ratio were also found (P  =  .0001). Nasalance scores showed a significant increase (P  =  .008 for nasal text and .044 for oral text). A significant positive correlation was observed between the amount of maxillary advancement and the increase in nasopharyngeal depth and hypernasality (P  =  .012 and .026, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopharyngeal function was deteriorated after maxillary advancement in CLP patients. There was a significant positive correlation between the amount of maxillary advancement and the increase in nasopharyngeal depth and hypernasality.

Velopharyngeal changes after maxillary distraction in cleft patients using a rigid external distraction device: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate early and late velopharyngeal changes in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients after use of the Rigid External Distractor (RED) device and to correlate these changes to the amount of maxillary advancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty Class III CLP patients were included in the study. Maxillary advancement was performed using the RED device in combination with titanium miniplates and screws for anchorage. Lateral cephalograms, nasometer, and nasopharyngoscope records were taken before distraction, immediately after distraction, and 1 year after distraction. A paired t-test was used to detect differences at P < .05. RESULTS: SNA angle and A point and ANS to Y axis were significantly increased after maxillary distraction (P  =  .0001). Statistically significant increases in nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal depths, velar angle, and need ratio were also found (P  =  .0001). Nasalance scores showed a significant increase (P  =  .008 for nasal text and .044 for oral text). A significant positive correlation was observed between the amount of maxillary advancement and the increase in nasopharyngeal depth and hypernasality (P  =  .012 and .026, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopharyngeal function was deteriorated after maxillary advancement in CLP patients. There was a significant positive correlation between the amount of maxillary advancement and the increase in nasopharyngeal depth and hypernasality.

The impact of metabolic syndrome and prevalent liver disease on living donor liver transplantation: a pressing need to expand the pool.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Organ shortage has been the ongoing obstacle to expanding liver transplantation worldwide. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is hoped to improve this shortage. The aim of the present study is to analyze the impact of metabolic syndrome and prevalent liver disease on living donations. METHODS: From July 2007 to May 2012, 1065 potential living donors were evaluated according to a stepwise evaluation protocol. The age of the worked-up donors ranged from 18 to 45 years. RESULTS: Only 190 (18%) were accepted for donation, and 875 (82%) were rejected. In total, 265 (24.9%) potential donors were excluded because of either diabetes or a body mass index >28. Some potential donors were excluded at initial screening because of incompatible blood groups (115; 10.8%), social reasons (40; 3.8%), or elevated liver enzymes (9; 1%). Eighty-five (8%) donors were excluded because of positive hepatitis serology. Steatosis resulted in the exclusion of 84 (8%) donors. In addition, 80 (7.5%) potential donors were rejected because of variations in biliary anatomy, and 20 (2%) were rejected because of aberrant vascular anatomy. Rejection due to biliary-related aberrancy decreased significantly in the second half of our program (11 vs. 4%, p = 0.001). In total, 110 (10.3%) potential donors were rejected because of insufficient remnant volume (<30%) as determined by CT volumetry, whereas 24 (2.2%) were rejected because of a graft-to-recipient body weight ratio less than 0.8%. CONCLUSION: Metabolic syndrome and viral hepatitis negatively impacted our living donor pool. Expanding the donor pool requires the implementation of new strategies.

First fully laparoscopic donor hepatectomy for pediatric liver transplantation using the indocyanine green near-infrared fluorescence imaging in the Middle East: a case report.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a well-established treatment modality for several pediatric end-stage liver diseases owning excellent long-term results. Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) through an open approach is a well-standardized procedure. This technique has been modified for a fully laparoscopic approach and gaining more and more interest worldwide. We report herein the first fully laparoscopic LLS for pediatric LDLT in the Middle East with the use of indocyanine green dye and near-infrared fluorescence imaging to identify the biliary ducts intraoperatively. The recipient was a 2-year-old girl affected by glycogen storage disease type IV. The mother, aged 21 years, was her donor. The surgical technique, key-points of this procedure, and outcome are hereby discussed.

Progress and outcomes of the first high-volume pediatric liver transplantation program in Saudi Arabia.

In 2010, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, established a dedicated Organ Transplant Center to overcome the inadequacy in transplantation care in the region. Due to the high need for solid organ transplantation in children, this center focused on pediatric transplantation. Between 2011 and 2013, a total of 112 pediatric liver transplantations have been performed in our center, mostly from living donors (n=103, 92%). Eight percent of transplants were performed from deceased donors (n=9). Of the 112 transplants, 38.4% of children were below one year of age. There was a predominance of genetic-metabolic disorders (48.2%) as indications for transplant. Extra-hepatic biliary atresia was the indication in only 29.5% of transplant cases. End-stage liver disease of unknown origin accounted for 7.1% of cases. The actuarial recipient and graft survival are 93% and 89%, respectively. In-hospital morbidities amounted to 17% for surgical complications (n=19) and 18% for medical complications (n=20). Seven percent of recipients developed biopsy proven rejection during hospital stay. Five patients died late after discharge suddenly at home or at peripheral hospitals for unknown reasons. Overall, this newly established pediatric liver transplantation program could develop into a high-volume pediatric liver transplantation center in a short period of time due to the high need for liver transplantation in the country. In contrast to the experience in western or eastern countries, there is a high rate of indications for metabolic/genetic disorders. The early results of patient and graft survival are convincing. The long-term outcomes were compromised by an insufficient general healthcare system and cultural barriers.