Surgical technique for right lobe adult living donor liver transplantation without venovenous bypass or portocaval shunting and with duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To report the authors' experience with adult living donor liver transplantation (ALDLT) without venovenous bypass and to describe modifications that will allow for a direct duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Adult living donor liver transplantation is being evaluated as a method to alleviate the organ shortage. Descriptions of the procedure have emphasized the use of venovenous bypass, portocaval decompression, and the mandatory use of a Roux-en-Y biliary enteric anastomosis. The authors describe a technique for ALDLT without venovenous bypass, portocaval decompression, or caval clamping in 11 recipients and describe the modifications to the procedure that may allow a duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction in certain cases. METHODS: Between March 1999 and March 2000, 11 ALDLTs were performed at the authors' institution. All procedures were performed without venovenous bypass, portocaval decompression, or caval clamping. After a modification to the procedure, five of the last six recipients underwent biliary reconstruction with a direct duct-to-duct anastomosis. Data regarding donor, recipient, and graft survival, complications, and graft function were collected. RESULTS: Recipients comprised five women and six men, mean age 48 years. Donors comprised five women and six men, mean age 36.5 years. Donor to recipient relationships included sibling, spouse, son, and daughter. Indications for transplantation were hepatitis C, hepatitis C with hepatocellular carcinoma, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, ethanol, and cryptogenic. No case required venovenous bypass or portocaval shunting. The right hepatic vein of the donor graft was anastomosed to the confluence of the left and middle hepatic veins in all cases. All donors are alive and well, with no adverse complications reported. Recipient and graft survival rates were 91% and 82%, respectively, for ALDLT versus 92% and 92% for recipients of cadaveric organs during the same time period. One recipient died of multiple organ failure and sepsis. Biliary reconstruction was performed by Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy in the six cases. In five of the last six recipients, direct duct-to-duct biliary reconstruction with a T tube was used. No anastomotic leaks or strictures occurred in the patients undergoing duct-to-duct reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Adult living donor liver transplantation can be performed safely and may help alleviate the organ shortage. Neither venovenous bypass nor portocaval shunting is necessary to perform the procedure, and modifications to both the donor and recipient hepatectomy procedures may allow biliary reconstruction to be performed by a direct duct-to-duct anastomosis in selected cases.

Choice of surgical technique influences perioperative outcomes in liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine how the choice of surgical technique influenced perioperative outcomes in liver transplantation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The standard technique of orthotopic liver transplantation with venovenous bypass (VVB) is commonly used to facilitate hemodynamic stability. However, this traditional procedure is associated with unique complications that can be avoided by using the technique of liver resection without caval excision (the piggyback technique). METHODS: A prospective comparison of the two procedures was conducted in 90 patients (34 piggyback and 56 with VVB) during a 2.5-year period. Although both groups had similar donor and recipient demographic characteristics, posttransplant outcomes were significantly better for the patients undergoing the piggyback technique. The effect of surgical technique was examined using a stepwise approach that considered its impact on two levels of perioperative and postoperative events. RESULTS: The analysis of the first level of perioperative events found that the piggyback procedure resulted in a 50% decrease in the duration of the anhepatic phase. The analysis of the second level of perioperative events found a significant relation between the anhepatic phase and the duration of surgery and between the anhepatic phase and the need for blood replacement. The analysis of the first level of postoperative events found that the intensive care unit stay was significantly related to both the duration of surgery and the need for blood replacement. The intensive care unit stay was in turn related to the second level of postoperative events, namely the length of hospital stay. Finally, total charges were directly related to length of hospital stay. The overall 1-year actuarial patient and graft survival rates were 94% in the piggyback and 96% in the VVB groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that surgical choices in complex procedures such as orthotopic liver transplantation trigger a chain of events that can significantly affect resource utilization. In the current healthcare climate, examination of the sequence of events that follow a specific treatment may provide a more complete framework for choosing between treatment alternatives.

A randomized, double-blinded trial of preemptive analgesia in laparoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that local anesthetic administered before skin incision, an example of preemptive analgesia, reduces postoperative pain for women undergoing laparoscopy, as compared with postincisional local anesthetic or placebo. METHODS: Patients undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy were randomized to one of three blinded treatment groups. Treatment group A patients received local infiltration of 0.5% bupivacaine at the surgical site before incision and a saline placebo infiltration before incision closure. Treatment group B received the saline placebo before skin incision and bupivacaine after laparoscopy but before closure of the skin incisions. For treatment group C patients, saline was infiltrated as a placebo before and after laparoscopy. All patients underwent a standardized general anesthetic induction and maintenance. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the modified McGill Present Pain Intensity scale. Pain and supplementary analgesic use was compared among the three treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients completed the study for analysis. Age, weight, height, race, indication, and operating time did not vary significantly between the three groups. By 24 hours after surgery, patients in treatment group A reported significantly lower pain scores (McGill Present Pain Intensity Scale: 0.5+/-0.9) than either treatment group B (1.6+/-1.3) or C (1.3+/-1.2). Group A patients also could tolerate a significantly longer time delay to their first analgesic medication than patients who received postincisional bupivacaine or than control patients who received no bupivacaine. CONCLUSION: The preemptive administration of bupivacaine before laparoscopy results in decreased postoperative pain and should allow a more rapid return to normal activities. The popular practice of infiltrating bupivacaine at time of incision closure does not offer any benefit in the control of pain after laparoscopy.