Targeting the Achilles' heel of adult living donor liver transplant: Corner-sparing sutures with mucosal eversion technique of biliary anastomosis.

Biliary complications are regarded as the Achilles' heel of liver transplantation, especially for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) due to smaller, multiple ducts and difficult ductal anatomy. Overall biliary complications reported in most series are between 10% and 30%. This study describes our modified technique of biliary anastomosis and its effects on incidence of biliary complications. This was a single-center retrospective study of 148 adult LDLT recipients between December 2011 and June 2014. Group 1 (n = 40) consisted of the first 40 patients for whom the standard technique of biliary anastomosis (minimal hilar dissection during donor duct division, high hilar division of the recipient bile duct, and preservation of the recipient duct periductal tissue) was used. Group 2 (n = 108) consisted of 108 patients for whom biliary anastomosis was done with the addition of corner-sparing sutures and mucosal eversion of the recipient duct to the standard technique. Primary outcome measures included biliary complications (biliary leaks and strictures). Biliary complications occurred in 7/40 patients in group 1 (17.5%) and in 4/108 patients in group 2 (3.7%). The technical factors mentioned above are aimed at preserving the blood supply of the donor and recipient ducts and hold the key for minimizing biliary complications in adult-to-adult LDLT.

Laparoscopy-assisted hepatectomy versus conventional (open) hepatectomy for living donors: when you know better, you do better.

The conventional incision for donor hepatectomy is a right subcostal incision with a midline extension. With increased experience in both donor hepatectomy and laparoscopy, the conventional incision can be shortened to a significant extent. Laparoscopic mobilization of the liver coupled with a hand port allows the insertion of one hand inside the abdomen for control; this makes small-incision donor hepatectomy a technically feasible alternative. We compared 26 right lobe donor hepatectomies performed with a laparoscopy-assisted technique (the laparoscopy-assisted donor hepatectomy group) to 24 donor hepatectomies performed with the conventional open technique (the conventional donor hepatectomy group). The donors in both groups and their recipients were followed for 6 months. Pain, discomfort related to the scar [including abdominal wall sensorineural deficits (numbness and differences in tactile and temperature sensations) and tightness around the scar], and donor quality of life (assessed with the International Quality of Life Assessment Short Form 8 scoring system) were compared between the 2 groups. In conclusion, laparoscopy-assisted surgery can be a technically feasible alternative in experienced hands, and as with other minimally invasive surgeries, it has advantages such as significantly less pain, reduced incision-related complications, and better donor quality of life during the early postoperative period without compromising donor safety.