Case report: Surgical resection of a retro-hepatic leiomyosarcoma involving atrial reconstruction, cardiopulmonary bypass, ex vivo tumor resection, and liver re-implantation.

Introduction: Leiomyosarcomas (LMS) involving the inferior vena cava (IVC) is a clinically rare entity, accounting for approximately 0.5% of all adult sarcomas. Case presentation: A 67-year-old male presented to the emergency department with mild back and lower abdominal pain. During the workup, a computed tomography scan without contrast showed an area of decreased attenuation within the liver adjacent to the intrahepatic IVC. Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed the involvement of the retro-hepatic IVC; biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of LMS. Given the location of the involvement of the retro-hepatic IVC, liver explantation was deemed necessary for adequate tumor resection. The superior extension of the tumor toward the heart necessitated Cardio-Pulmonary (CPB). The patient successfully underwent a complex surgical procedure involving liver explantation with ex vivo back-table resection of the retro-hepatic LMS, replacement of the retro-hepatic vena cava with a ringed Gore-Tex graft, liver re-implantation, and hepatic vein-atrial reconstruction under cardiopulmonary bypass. There were no intraoperative or post-op complications. Discussion: The role of vascular reconstruction of the IVC varies depending on the level and extent of the tumor, with options ranging from primary repair, ligation, or reconstruction dictated. Surgical resection with negative margins remains the treatment of choice due to the lack of efficacy of adjuvant therapies. Importantly, liver explantation offers a chance for complete surgical resection and reconstruction. Similarly, the complex nature of the tumor necessitated a pioneering approach involving direct hepato-atrial venous anastomosis. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case in which the hepatic veins were anastomosed directly to the right atrium while also replacing the native vena cava with a separate graft.

Gastrointestinal side effects in liver transplant recipients taking enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium vs. mycophenolate mofetil.

In the setting of liver transplantation, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) may be used as an adjuvant therapy for immunosuppression to prevent graft rejection; however, its use may be limited due to severe gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. In contrast, enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) may be associated with less severe side effects and hence better tolerability. We compared the side effects of EC-MPS to MMF in liver transplant patients in a de novo study (Study I-randomized, prospective, double-blinded) and a conversion study (Study II). In both studies, the severity of GI symptoms was assessed at various time points using the Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale (GSRS) survey, a validated survey of GI symptoms (abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, diarrhea, and constipation). In Study I, the symptoms of 30 recipients receiving EC-MPS (n = 15) were compared to 15 recipients receiving MMF. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) of the total GSRS scores and symptom syndrome subscores revealed no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the two medications over time. A conversion study (Study II) with 29 participants, however, showed that over time, all GI symptoms improved significantly (p < 0.001) when the patients were treated with EC-MPS instead of MMF.