Impact and Consequences of Recipient Gastroduodenal Artery Ligation Before Hepatic Artery Anastomosis During Orthotopic Liver Transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: The recipient's gastroduodenal artery is often ligated before the hepatic artery anastomosis during orthotopic liver transplant, to gain either mobility or length of recipient's hepatic artery, potentially protecting the anastomosis by preventing "steal syndrome." In this study, our aim was to evaluate the consequences of gastroduodenal artery ligation and its effect on prevention of hepatic artery thrombosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed deceased-donor orthotopic liver transplant procedures (n = 210) performed at a single center between January 2016 and July 2021 to compare outcomes between recipients with (group 1) and recipients without (group 2) gastroduodenal artery ligation. Group 1 included 78 patients (37%), in which the recipient's common hepatic artery was used for arterial anastomosis; group 2 included 132 patients (63%), in which the right hepatic artery orthe proper hepatic artery was used for arterial anastomosis. Occurrences of hepatic artery thrombosis, postoperative hyperamylasemia, nausea and vomiting, and delayed feeding were compared between the groups. RESULTS: There was no incidence of hepatic artery thrombosis reported in either group. In group 1, 31 patients (39.7%) were reported to have postoperative hyperamylasemia, ranging from 200 to 4700 U/L accompanied by delayed feeding, whereas, in group 2, only 16 of 132 patients (12%) had postoperative hyperamylasemia, ranging from 200 to 1400 U/L (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Ligation of recipient's gastroduodenal artery is not associated with decreased risk of hepatic artery thrombosis compared with nonligation. However, the procedure does have consequences in the form of possible postoperative hyperamylasemia, leading to delayed feeding probably due to decreased oral tolerance.

Changing opportunities for liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Aim was to study the early impact of acuity circle-based allocation implementation system on liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. METHODS: We assessed characteristics of HCC and non-HCC deceased donor orthotopic liver transplants (OLT) in the year before (2/2019-2/2020) and after (3/2020-2/2021) introduction of the acuity circle policy using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)/United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. RESULTS: Total OLTs reduced from 6699 in the preacuity circle era to 6660 in the postacuity circle era (-.6%); this decrease is mostly driven by a decrease in HCC transplants (1529 to 1351; -11.6%). Six out of 11 regions had a reduction in the absolute number and percentage of HCC transplants with significant reductions in regions 2 (-37.8%, p < .001) and 4 (-28.3%, p = .001). DISCUSSION: The introduction of median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) at transplant minus 3 (MMaT-3) exception points, has created differential opportunities for HCC patients, in low-MELD as opposed to high-MELD areas, despite having the same disease. This effect has become more prominent following the implementation of acuity circle-based allocation system. Ongoing investigation of these trends is needed to ensure that HCC patients are not disparately disadvantaged due to their location.

The impact of post-transplant diabetes mellitus on liver transplant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is common after liver transplantation (LT). Yet, how PTDM relates to graft outcomes and survival needs elucidation as more individuals are transplanted for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study of adult LT recipients (2003-2016) identified PTDM incidence and associations with graft steatosis, rejection, and post-LT patient survival. Multivariable analysis investigated predictors of PTDM. Kaplan-Meier curves depicted patient survival 5 years post-LT. RESULTS: Among 415 adult LT recipients, 23% had pre-LT DM and 13% were transplanted for NAFLD. PTDM incidence was 34.7%, 46.9%, and 56.2% and overall survival was 90%, 80.9%, and 71.7% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Over a third of non-NAFLD patients developed PTDM. Half of PTDM cases developed by 6 months and 75% by 12 months. The PTDM group had more rejection episodes compared to no PTDM (31.9% vs 21.8%, P = 0.055), with trends toward worse patient survival 5 years post-LT (log-rank test P = 0.254). Age was the only significant predictor of PTDM. CONCLUSIONS: Post-transplant diabetes mellitus occurs rapidly in the post-LT period and is a significant problem for both NAFLD and non-NAFLD LT recipients. Age is a significant risk factor for PTDM. Outcomes trended toward increased rejection and worse survival among PTDM individuals, suggesting the benefit of early strategies targeting glucose control.

Marijuana Consumption in Liver Transplant Recipients.

Marijuana is legalized for either medical or recreational use in over half of the states in the United States and in Canada, but many transplant centers will not list patients who are using marijuana. However, the effect of marijuana on transplant outcomes remains unclear. Thus, we performed a retrospective analysis of all adult (≥18 years old) liver transplant patients treated at our center between 2007 and 2017. Patients were grouped according to their marijuana use and tobacco smoking status. We also evaluated tobacco smoking status for the comparative evaluation. Posttransplant morbidity, mortality, and graft survival were evaluated. In total, 316 patients were included: 171 (54%) patients were tobacco smokers (70 current; 101 former), 81 (26%) patients were marijuana smokers (13 current; 68 former), and 64 (20#x0025;) patients were both marijuana and tobacco smokers. A total of 136 (43%) reported never smoking marijuana or tobacco. After adjustment, current tobacco users were over 3 times as likely to die within 5 years compared with never users (hazard ratio [HR], 3.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63-6.46; P < 0.001), but no difference was seen between current/former and never marijuana users (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.26-1.04; P = 0.06). No significant differences in inpatient respiratory complications, reintubation, or >24-hour intubation was seen. Overall, pretransplant marijuana use, past or current, does not appear to impact liver transplant outcomes, though tobacco smoking remains detrimental.

Lacrosse equipment and cervical spinal cord space during immobilization: preliminary analysis.

CONTEXT: Removal of the lacrosse helmet to achieve airway access has been discouraged based only on research in which cervical alignment was examined. No researchers have examined the effect of lacrosse equipment on the cervical space available for the spinal cord (SAC). OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of lacrosse equipment on the cervical SAC and cervical-thoracic angle (CTA) in the immobilized athlete. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Outpatient imaging center. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Ten volunteer lacrosse athletes (age = 20.7 +/- 1.87 years, height = 180.3 +/- 8.3 cm, mass = 91 +/- 12.8 kg) with no history of cervical spine injury or disease and no contraindications to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). INTERVENTION(S): The lacrosse players were positioned supine on a spine board for all test conditions. An MRI scan was completed for each condition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The independent variables were condition (no equipment, shoulder pads only [SP], and full gear that included helmet and shoulder pads [FG]), and cervical spine level (C3-C7). The dependent variables were the SAC and CTA. The MRI scans were evaluated midsagittally. The average of 3 measures was used as the criterion variable. The SAC data were analyzed using a 3 x 5 analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures. The CTA data were analyzed with a 1-way repeated-measures ANOVA. RESULTS: We found no equipment x level interaction effect (F(3.7,72) = 1.34, P = .279) or equipment main effect (F(2,18) = 1.20, P = .325) for the SAC (no equipment = 5.04 +/- 1.44 mm, SP = 4.69 +/- 1.36 mm, FG = 4.62 +/- 1.38 mm). The CTA was greater (ie, more extension; critical P = .0167) during the SP (32.64 degrees +/- 3.9 degrees) condition than during the no-equipment (25.34 degrees +/- 2.3 degrees ; t(9) = 7.67, P = .001) or FG (26.81 degrees +/- 5.1 degrees; t(9) = 4.80, P = .001) condition. CONCLUSIONS: Immobilizing healthy lacrosse athletes with shoulder pads and no helmets affected cervical spine alignment but did not affect SAC. Further research is needed to determine and identify appropriate care of the lacrosse athlete with a spine injury.