Outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocelluler carcinoma from living donor versus deceased donor within University of Southern California San Francisco criteria: a report from Turkey.

Background: Hepatocellular cancer (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer with increasing incidence. Liver transplantation (LT) has been accepted as main curative liver cancer treatment. The effectiveness of LDLT as opposed to Deceased Donor Liver Transplant (DDLT) for patients with HCC is still controversial. There is limited data comparing the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing LDLT or DDLT for HCCs that do not meet the Milan criteria. Methods: We aimed to compare the perioperative and survival outcomes of LDLT with DDLT in HCC patients.Patients underwent LT between January 2012 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 137 patients who met the UCSF criteria. Of these, 75 patients received LDLT and 62 patients DDLT.The primary end points in the present study were oncologic outcomes such as the recurrence rate, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of LDLT and DDLT in patients with HCC. Results: PET-CT SUVmax value, the amount of erythrocyte solution (ES) as blood transfusion of red cells given and the tumor recurrence rate were significantly higher among the deceased patients recurrence, ES, PET-CT SUVmax value and tumor differentiation had significant effects on survival. In the multivariate reduced model, cox regression analysis showed significant effects of recurrence, ES, locoregional treatment response and PET-CT on survival.Albeit not significant, the one-year recurrence rate in the LDLT was similar to that in the DDLT, three- and five-year recurrence rates were higher in DDLT compared to LDLT. Conclusion: There is less chance of cold ischemia time and better-quality grafts with minimal fatty changes, lower recurrence rates and similar survival rates can be achieved in LDLT compared to DDLT.

The role of Intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) and methylene blue tests in reducing bile leakage after living donor hepatectomy.

AIM: Liver transplantation remains the only curative treatment in end stage liver disease. Biliary complications remain the most common major morbidity causes in hepatic resection. We aimed to determine and eliminate the bile leakage in donor hepatectomy of LDLT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was conducted retrospective and one center study. The study population included 110 consequential liver donors with major liver resection (more than three segments). The population was divided into three groups for data analyses. Primary study groups included 40 donors subjected to methylene blue test starting in April 2013 and 40 donors subjected to intraoperative cholangiography started in March 2014. RESULTS: A total of 110 liver donors (42.7% women) were included in the study. Postoperative biliary complications were less in methylene blue and intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) groups. Bile leakage was significantly higher in control group (23.3%) compared to methylene blue (5%) and IOC groups (2%) Average duration of hospital stay and duration of operation were significantly higher in control group compared to methylene blue and IOC groups. CONCLUSION: In our study we conducted to establish biliary leakage in living donor hepatectomy which intraoperative cholangiography test was used to determine. Many intraoperative methods have been introduced to prevent biliary leakage and development of complications. We have showed that IOC test used in the present study could be easily applied in both living liver donor hepatectomy and other major hepatectomy cases. IOC test reduced postoperative biliary leakage incidence and did not increase incidence of other complications.