Open to robotic right donor hepatectomy: A tectonic shift in surgical technique.

Robotic right live donor hepatectomy (r-LDRH) has been reported with reduced morbidity compared to open donor right hepatectomy (o-LDRH) in few recent series. Nevertheless, its routine use is debated. We present a large series comparing pure r-LDRH with o-LDRH. Consecutive r-LDRH performed from June 2018 to June 2020 (n = 102) were compared with consecutive donors undergoing o-LDRH (n = 152) from February 2016 to February 2018, a period when r-LDRH was not available at this center. Propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of 89 case-control pairs was additionally performed. Primary endpoints were length of high dependency unit (HDU) and hospital stay and Clavien-Dindo graded complications among donors. Although r-LDRH took longer to perform (540 vs. 462 min, P < .001), the postoperative peak transaminases levels (P < .001), the length of HDU (3 vs. 4 days, P < .001), and hospital stay (8 vs. 9 days, P < .001) were lower in in donors undergoing r-LDRH. Clavien-Dindo graded complications were similar (16.67% in r-LDRH and 13.16% in o-LDRH). The rates of early allograft dysfunction (1.6% vs. 3.3%), bile leak (14.7% vs. 10.7%), and 1-year mortality (13.7% vs. 11.8%) were comparable between r-LDRH and o-LDRH recipients. PSM analysis yielded similar results between the groups. These data support the safety and feasibility of r-LDRH in select donors.

Technique of robotic right donor hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive right donor hepatectomy (RDH) has been reported, this innovation is yet to be widely accepted by transplant community. Bleeding during transection, division of right hepatic duct (RHD), suturing of donor duct as well as retrieval with minimal warm ischemia are the primary concerns of most donor surgeons. We describe our simplified technique of robotic RDH evolved over 144 cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Right lobe mobilization is performed in a clockwise manner from right triangular ligament over inferior vena cavae up to hepatocaval ligament. Transection is initiated using a combination of bipolar diathermy and monopolar shears controlled by console surgeon working in tandem with lap CUSA operated by assistant surgeon. With the guidance of indocyanine green cholangiography, RHD is divided with robotic endowrist scissors (Potts), and remnant duct is sutured with 6-0 PDS. Final posterior liver transection is completed caudocranial without hanging manoeuvre. Right lobe with intact vascular pedicle is placed in a bag, vascular structures then divided, and retrieved through Pfannenstiel incision. CONCLUSION: Our technique may be easy to adapt with the available robotic instruments. Further innovation of robotic platform with liver friendly devices could make robotic RDH the standard of care in future.

Middle hepatic vein reconstruction in adult living donor liver transplantation: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In adult right lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), venous drainage of the anterior sector is usually reconstructed on the bench to form a neo-middle hepatic vein (MHV). Reconstruction of the MHV for drainage of the anterior sector is crucial for optimal graft function. The conduits used for reconstruction include cryopreserved allografts, synthetic grafts, or the recipient portal vein. However, the ideal choice remains a matter of debate. This study compares the efficacy of the native recipient portal vein (RPV) with PTFE grafts for reconstruction of the neo-MHV. METHODS: Patients in this equivalence-controlled, parallel-group trial were randomized to either RPV (62 patients) or PTFE (60 patients) for use in the reconstruction of the neo-MHV. Primary endpoint was neo-MHV patency at 14 days and 90 days. Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and post-transplant parameters as scored by predefined scoring systems. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of neo-MHV thrombosis at 14 days (RPV 6.5 per cent versus PTFE 10 per cent; P = 0.701) and 90 days (RPV 14.5 per cent versus PTFE 18.3 per cent; P = 0.745) between the two groups. Irrespective of the type of graft used for reconstruction, 90-day all-cause and sepsis-specific mortality was significantly higher among patients who developed neo-MHV thrombosis. Neo-MHV thrombosis and sepsis were identified as risk factors for mortality on Cox proportional hazards analysis. No harms or unintended side effects were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: In adult LDLT using modified right lobe graft, use of either PTFE or RPV for neo-MHV reconstruction resulted in similar early patency rates. Irrespective of the type of conduit used for reconstruction, neo-MHV thrombosis is a significant risk factor for mortality. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2018/11/016315 (www.ctri.nic.in).

Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial of N-acetylcysteine infusion following live donor liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The role of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in improving outcomes following live donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is not well established. We designed a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to study the role of NAC infusion in recipients undergoing LDLT. METHODS: We assigned 150 patients who underwent LDLT by computer-generated random sequence on 1:1 ratio to either NAC group or placebo group. Patients in the NAC group received NAC infusion which was started at beginning of graft implantation at an initial loading dose of 150 mg/kg/h over 1 h, followed by 12.5 mg/kg/h for 4 h and then at 6.25 mg/kg/h continued for 91 h. Placebo group received normal saline. The primary endpoint was composite occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) in the recipient. Secondary endpoints included levels of bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), creatinine, INR, primary graft non-function, intraoperative bleeding, post-transplant hospital stay and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The composite endpoint did not show any significant difference between the NAC and placebo group (21.3% vs 29.3%, p = 0.35). Peak AST (425.65 IU/L vs 702.24 IU/L, p = 0.02) and peak ALT (406.65 IU/L vs 677.99 IU/L, p = 0.01) levels were significantly lower in the study group. Time to normalization of transaminases was also significantly low in the study group. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative NAC infusion following LDLT resulted in significantly lower postoperative AST and ALT levels. Rapid normalization of transaminases was also observed. This, however, did not translate to improvement in AKI or EAD.

Surgery for cystic tumors of pancreas: Report of high-volume, multicenter Indian experience over a decade.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cystic neoplasms remain uncommon. Although data are accumulating on the incidence of pancreatic cystic neoplasms in the published literature, Indian data on these tumors are sparse. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We collated data from prospectively maintained databases of patients operated for cystic tumors of the pancreas from 2007 to 2016 at 7 academic centers across India to gain insights into clinical presentation and outcome of the operative treatment of these tumors. Data were compared with large series across the world to understand the regional differences in this pathology. RESULTS: Of the 423 patients, there were 98 (23.2%) serous cystic neoplasms, 128 (30.2%) mucinous neoplasms, 34(8%) intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and 121 (28.6%) solid pseudopapillary epithelial neoplasms managed in these 7 academic centers. Malignancy (adenocarcinoma, malignant intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and mucinous cystadenocarcinoma) was reported in 39 (9.2%) patients. Median age at presentation was 41 years, and the female-to-male ratio was 3.4:1. At presentation, 81% of patients were symptomatic. A total of 66.7% of lesions were located in body and tail region of the pancreas. Median tumor size was 6 cm. Operative resection with curative intent was performed in 405 of these 423 patients. Major morbidity occurred in 12%, and 30-day perioperative mortality was 0.9%. Laparoscopic resections were performed in 18% and spleen-preserving resections were performed in 3% of patients. CONCLUSION: Female preponderance, young age, and a benign nature of most pancreatic cystic neoplasms were observed. Large size of tumors on presentation, fewer intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm resections, and a much greater incidence of solid pseudopapillary epithelial neoplasms were distinctive of this study. Although the proportion of laparoscopic resections and splenic preservation was less compared with Western centers, the perioperative morbidity and mortality was on par with established standards.

Antegrade Hepatic Artery and Portal Vein Perfusion Versus Portal Vein Perfusion Alone in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Randomized Trial.

Traditionally, deceased donor liver grafts receive dual perfusion (DP) through the portal vein and the hepatic artery (HA) either in situ or on the back table. HA perfusion is avoided in living donor liver grafts for fear of damage to the intima and consequent risk of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT). However, biliary vasculature is predominantly derived from the HA. We hypothesized that antegrade perfusion of the HA in addition to the portal vein on the back table could reduce the incidence of postoperative biliary complications. Consecutive adult patients undergoing living donor liver transplantations were randomized after donor hepatectomy to receive graft perfusion of histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution either via both the HA and portal vein (DP group, n = 62) or only through the portal vein (standard perfusion [SP] group, n = 62). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of biliary complications (biliary leak/stricture). Secondary endpoints included HAT and patient survival. The incidence of biliary stricture was significantly lower in the DP group (6.5% versus 19.4%; odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.95; P = 0.04). There was no significant reduction in the incidence of HAT, bile leak, or hospital stay between the 2 groups. The 3-year mortality and graft survival rates were significantly higher among patients who received DP compared with SP (P = 0.004 and P = 0.003, respectively). On multivariate analysis, nonperfusion of the HA and preceding bile leak were found to be risk factors for the development of biliary stricture (P = 0.04 and P < 0.001, respectively). In conclusion, DP of living donor liver grafts through both the HA and portal vein on the back table may protect against the development of biliary stricture. This could translate to improved patient survival in the short term.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Small-for-Size Grafts: Does Size Really Matter?

BACKGROUND: In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) > 0.8% is perceived as the critical graft size. This lower limit of GRWR (0.8%) has been challenged over the last decade owing to the surgical refinements, especially related to inflow and outflow modulation techniques. Our aim was to compare the recipient outcome in small-for-size (GRWR < 0.8) versus normal-sized grafts (GRWR > 0.8) and to determine the risk factors for mortality when small-for-size grafts (SFSG) were used. METHODS: Data of 200 transplant recipients and their donors were analyzed over a period of two years. Routine practice of harvesting middle hepatic vein (MHV) or reconstructing anterior sectoral veins into neo-MHV was followed during LDLT. Outcomes were compared in terms of mortality, hospital stay, ICU stay, and occurrence of various complications such as functional small-for-size syndrome (F-SFSS), hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), portal vein thrombosis (PVT), and postoperative sepsis. A multivariate analysis was also done to determine the risk factors for mortality in both the groups. RESULTS: Recipient and donor characteristics, intraoperative variables, and demographical data were comparable in both the groups (GRWR < 0.8 and GRWR ≥ 0.8). Postoperative 90-day mortality (15.5% vs. 22.85%), mean ICU stay (10 vs. 10.32 days), and mean hospital stay (21.4 vs. 20.76 days) were statistically similar in the groups. There was no difference in postoperative outcomes such as occurrence of SFSS, HAT, PVT, EAD, or sepsis between the groups. Thrombosis of MHV/reconstructed MHV was a risk factor for mortality in grafts with GRWR < 0.8 but not in those with GRWR > 0.8. CONCLUSION: Graft survival after LDLT using a small-for-size right lobe graft (GRWR < 0.8%) is as good as with normal grafts. However, patency of anterior sectoral outflow by MHV or reconstructed MHV is crucial to maintain graft function when SFSG are used.

A New Score to Predict Recipient Mortality from Preoperative Donor and Recipient Characteristics in Living Donor Liver Transplantation (DORMAT Score).

BACKGROUND Recipient outcomes in adult living donor liver transplantation depend on various characteristics in both recipient and donor. We aimed to derive a score based upon preoperative characteristics in donor and recipient that could predict the recipient mortality in adult living donor liver transplantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS Retrospective data of 100 living donor liver transplantation recipients and their respective donors were analyzed for preoperative factors that correlated with recipient mortality. Statistically significant factors were weighted appropriately to derive a regression equation to obtain a donor-to-recipient match (DORMAT) score. This score was applied to 71 patients prospectively and their outcome was analyzed. RESULTS Donor-recipient match (DORMAT) score, derived using regression analysis of the significant variables was [0.002 (Recipient age) + 0.013 (Recipient BMI) + 0.055 (SBP) + 0.344 (HRS) + 0.022 (Pre-op culture positivity) + 0.01 (Donor age) - 0.639]×100. DORMAT score, when validated to a prospective cohort of 71 adult-to-adult LDLT patients, had a C-statistic (area under ROC curve) of 0.712. The mortality rate was seen to increase with increasing DORMAT score. CONCLUSIONS DORMAT score is a useful clinical decision-making tool to predict recipient mortality in adult living donor liver transplantation.

Quality of life of liver donors following donor hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Although morbidity following living liver donation is well characterized, there is sparse data regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of donors. METHODS: HRQOL of 200 consecutive live liver donors from 2011-2014 performed at an Indian center were prospectively collected using the SF-36 version 2, 1 year after surgery. The effect of donor demographics, operative details, post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo and 50-50 criteria), and recipient mortality on the quality-of-life (QOL) scoring was analyzed. RESULTS: Among 200 donors (female/male=141:59), 77 (38.5%) had complications (14.5%, 16.5%, 4.5%, and 3.5%, Clavien-Dindo grades I-IV, respectively). The physical composite score (PCS) of donors 1 year after surgery was less than ideal (48.75±9.5) while the mental composite score (MCS) was good (53.37±6.16). Recipient death was the only factor that showed a statistically significant correlation with both PCS (p<0.001) and MCS (p=0.05). Age above 50 years (p<0.001), increasing body mass index (BMI) (p=0.026), and hospital stay more than 14 days ( p= 0.042) negatively affected the physical scores while emergency surgery (p<0.001) resulted in lower mental scores. Gender, postoperative complications, type of graft, or fulfillment of 50-50 criteria did not influence HRQOL. On asking the hypothetical question whether the donors would be willing to donate again, 99% reiterated there will be no change in their decision. CONCLUSION: Recipient death, donation in emergency setting, age above 50, higher BMI, and prolonged hospital stay are factors that lead to impaired HRQOL following live liver donation. Despite this, 99% donors did not repent the decision to donate.

Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant for type I diabetes with renal failure: Anaesthetic considerations.

Pancreatic grafts have been successfully used in patients with diabetes and are combined with kidney transplantation in patients with renal failure. The propagation of awareness in organ donation in India has increased the donor pool of transplantable organs in the last few years making multi visceral transplants feasible in our country. We present the anaesthetic management of a 32-year-old male with diabetes mellitus and end-stage renal failure who was successfully managed with a combined pancreas and kidney transplantation.