Successful algorithm for selective liver biopsy in the right hepatic lobe live donor (RHLD).

Routine versus selective predonation liver biopsy (LBx) remains controversial for assuring the safety of right hepatic lobe live donor (RHLD). Between December 1999 and March 2007, 403 potential RHLD were evaluated; 142 donated. Indications for selective LBx were: abnormal liver function tests or imaging studies, body mass index (BMI) >28, history of substance abuse or family history of immune mediated liver disease. All donors had a LBx at the time of surgery. Of 403 potential RLD, 149(36.9%) were accepted as donors, 25(6.3%) had their recipient receive a deceased donor graft, 94(23.4%) were rejected, 52(12.9%) stopped the evaluation process, 76(18.8%) withdrew from the process and 7(1.7%) are currently completing evaluation. Eighty-seven (21.5%) met criteria and were biopsied. Seventy-three (83.9%) had either normal (n = 24) or macrosteatosis <10% (n = 49); 51 of these donated. Abnormal LBx eliminated 15 potential donors. No significant abnormalities were found in donation biopsies of donors not meeting algorithm criteria. Three of 87 (3.4%) had complications requiring overnight admission (2 for pain, 1 for bleeding; transfusion not required). Use of this algorithm resulted in 78% of potential donors avoiding biopsy and potential complications. No significant liver pathology was identified in donors not meeting criteria for evaluation LBx. Routine predonation LBx is unnecessary in potential RHLD.

Trigger finger release with hand surface landmark ratios: an anatomic and clinical study.

The purpose of this study was to identify surface landmark ratios to locate the A1 pulley and clarify the controversy of differing anatomic descriptions of the A1, C0, and A2 pulleys. Minimally invasive and percutaneous approaches to A1 pulley release may be facilitated with surface landmark ratios, which identify and predict the proximal and distal margins of the A1 pulley. Two-hundred fifty-sixty fingers were dissected in 64 preserved cadaver hands. Measurements of A1 pulley lengths and pulley margins in relation to surface landmarks were obtained. We found that the distance from the palmar digital crease to the proximal interphalangeal crease (mean, 2.42 +/- 0.03 cm) corresponds to the distance of the proximal edge of the A1 pulley from the palmar digital crease (mean, 2.45 +/- 0.03 cm). The mean absolute difference between these two measured distances in each finger was 0.13 cm, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.11 to 0.14 cm. Thus, the distance between the palmar digital crease and the proximal interphalangeal crease can be used to predict the distance between the palmar digital crease and the A1 pulley proximal edge with reasonable accuracy. A1 pulley length averaged 0.98 +/- 0.02 cm for the small finger and 1.17 +/- 0.02 cm for the index, middle, and ring fingers. The length of the A1 pulley was significantly shorter (p < 0.001) for the small finger than for the index, middle, and ring fingers. Additionally, a cruciate (C0) pulley was consistently located between the A1 and A2 pulleys, an average of 0.46 cm proximal to the palmar digital crease, which can serve as guide for concluding the release of the A1 pulley. Clinically, hand surface landmark ratios were used to release 32 trigger fingers with a minimally invasive technique, without a complication during 4- to 30-week follow-up. We conclude that hand surface landmark ratios can serve to locate the proximal A1 pulley edge, thus facilitating complete trigger finger release by either open or minimally invasive techniques. Additionally, our study clarifies the discrepancy of prior smaller reports of the pulley system anatomy regarding the existence of the C0 pulley between the A1 and A2 pulleys. The cruciate fibers of this C0 pulley can serve as the distal boundary for release of trigger finger.