Open Living Donor Hepatectomy Research Articles

Comparison of the analgesic effect of intrathecal morphine between laparoscopic and open living donor hepatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis.

Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is being increasingly adopted in transplant programs due to its numerous advantages. However, the role of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in laparoscopic donor hepatectomy has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to compare the analgesic effects and safety of ITM between laparoscopic and open donor hepatectomy. This retrospective study included 742 donors who underwent hepatectomy with ITM between April 2007 and June 2019. Among them, 168 and 574 donors underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH), respectively. Propensity score matching yielded two comparable groups of 168 donors each. The primary endpoint was the incidence of moderate-to-severe pain (maximum numerical rating scale [NRS] pain score ≥ 4) within 24 postoperative hours. The LH group had a significantly lower incidence of moderate-to-severe pain within 24 postoperative hours than the OH group (16.1% vs 64.3%, P < .001). Moreover, the cumulative rescue intravenous opioids (in morphine-equivalent dose) on postoperative day (POD) 1 was lower in the LH group than in the OH group (3.3 [0-8.3] mg vs 10 [3.3-17.3] mg; P < .001). There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of respiratory depression (2.4% vs 0.6%; P = .371) and prescriptions for pruritus (14.3% vs 15.5%; P = .878). However, the prescriptions for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was significantly higher in the LH group than in the OH group (64.9% vs 41.7%; P < .001). The predictors of antiemetic agent prescription included the use of laparoscopic procedure (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-3.79; P = .021) and female sex (adjusted OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 3.19-9.92; P < .001). Preoperative ITM administration resulted in a significantly lower incidence of moderate-to-severe pain within 24 postoperative hours after laparoscopic donor hepatectomy than after open donor hepatectomy.

Hepatic and portal vein transection by vascular stapler in open living donor hepatectomy – A retrospective cohort study

BackgroundIn an effort to increase donor safety in living donor liver transplantation, the utilization of vascular staplers for the division of the right portal and hepatic veins in patients undergoing right lobe liver donation for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was implemented. In here we report our experience with vascular staplers in patients undergoing LDLT and evaluate the subsequent feasibility and safety for donors. Material and methods17 cases of living donor liver transplant were retrospectively analyzed. The right portal vein was transected directly at the bifurcation of the main portal vein, the right hepatic vein was resected directly at the wall of the inferior vena cava using a vascular stapler device. ResultsWe registered a complication rate of 41.2% (7 donors). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, grade II and grade III complications were each observed in 5.9% and grade IIIb complications in 29.4%, whereas catastrophic bleeding, complications with residual disability or the necessity of re-laparatomy did not occur. Upon 6 weeks, all donors were able to return to their previous occupation in fully recovered condition. ConclusionsThe utilization of vascular staplers in donors during open LDLT presents an encouraging alternative to manual over-sewing of vascular stumps. Apart from its timesaving aspect, the technique reduces the potential risk of life-threatening clamp slippage with subsequent uncontrolled blood loss.

Change of Anesthetic Management From Open to Laparoscopic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy After Learning Curve

In our hospital, open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) began in 1996 and laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LLDH) began in 2013. In this study, we focus on the change of anesthetic management from OLDH to LLDH. Under the approval of the Institutional Review Board of our hospital, medical records of the last 2 years (2011 and 2012 vs 2019 and 2020) of each OLDH and LLDH era were collected. Left hepatectomy in any period and OLDH during the LLDH era were excluded. There were 175 OLDHs and 213 LLDHs. We performed 836 cases of OLDH before 2011 and 206 cases of LLDH before 2019. Laryngeal mask airway replaced intubation in half of LLDH cases. Erector spinae plane block was performed in a quarter of LLDH cases. Lung-protective ventilation with low tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure were applied for LLDH. Additional peripheral venous line was decreased, and there was no central venous catheterization. Anesthesia duration time was reduced and crystalloid infusion per hour was also decreased. There was no intraoperative transfusion and there was no difference in postoperative transfusion incidence. Reoperation rate was not different. Only 1 donor in OLDH transferred to the intensive care unit after the operation because of uncontrolled hypertension. Length of hospital stay was decreased. As the surgical tactics for living liver donors become less invasive, the anesthetic strategy also becomes less invasive. In addition, new types of airway management, ventilation method, and analgesic technique have been introduced.

Comparison of laparoscopic and open living donor hepatectomy: A meta-analysis.

Laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (LDH), accepted as a minimally invasive approach, has become increasingly popular for living donor liver transplant. However, the outcomes of LDH remain to be fully clarified when compared with open living donor hepatectomy. Thus, our meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of laparoscopic in comparison with conventional open donor hepatectomy.The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase electronic databases were searched to identify the articles concerning the comparison of the efficacy of laparoscopic versus open surgery in treatment of living donor liver transplantation updated to March, 2020. The main search terms and medical Subject Heading terms were: “living donor,” “liver donor,” “minimally invasive,” “laparoscopic surgery,” and “open surgery.” After rigorous evaluation on quality, the data was extracted from eligible publications. The outcomes of interest included intraoperative and postoperative results.The inclusion criteria were met by a total of 20 studies. In all, 2001 subjects involving 633 patients who received laparoscopic surgery and 1368 patients who received open surgery were included. According to the pooled result of surgery duration, the laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter duration of hospital stay (MD = −1.07, 95% CI −1.85 to −0.29; P = .007), less blood loss (MD = −57.57, 95% CI −65.07 to −50.07; P < .00001), and less postoperative complications (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.44–0.85; P = .003). And the open donor hepatectomy achieved a trend of shorter operation time (MD = 30.31, 95% CI 13.93–46.69; P = .0003) than laparoscopic group. Similar results were found in terms of ALT (P = .52) as well as the AST (P = .47) peak level between the 2 groups.LDH showed the better perioperative outcomes as compared with open donor hepatectomy. The findings revealed that LDH may be a feasible and safe procedure for the living donor liver transplantation.

A comparative study of postoperative outcomes between minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy and open living donor hepatectomy: The Korean organ transplantation registry

BackgroundThis study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy in comparison with the open procedure, using Korean Organ Transplantation Registry data. MethodsWe reviewed the prospectively collected data of all 1,694 living liver donors (1,071 men, 623 women) who underwent donor hepatectomy between April 2014 and December 2017. The donors were grouped on the basis of procedure type to the minimally invasive procedure group (n = 304) or to the open procedure group (n = 1,390) and analyzed the relationships between clinical data and complications. ResultsNo donors died after the procedure. The overall complication rates after operation in the minimally invasive procedure group and the open procedure group were 6.2% and 3.5%, respectively. Biliary complications were the most frequent events in both groups (minimally invasive procedure group, 2.4%; open procedure group, 1.6%). The majority of complications occurred within 7 days after surgery in both groups. The duration of hospitalization was shorter in the minimally invasive procedure group than in the open procedure group (9.04 ± 3.78 days versus 10.29 ± 4.01 days; P < .05). ConclusionBased on its similar outcomes in our study, minimally invasive donor hepatectomy cannot be an alternative option compared with the open procedure method. To overcome this, we need to ensure better surgical safety, such as lower complication rate and shorter duration of hospitalization.

Adjunctive dexmedetomidine infusion in open living donor hepatectomy: A way to enhance postoperative analgesia and recovery.

Open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) is a highly painful procedure. Advanced strategies for enhancing perioperative analgesia and accelerating recovery are needed for patients undergoing OLDH. This study evaluated the effects of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine (DEX) during OLDH on postoperative analgesia and recovery. This prospective, randomised, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled study included 34 patients randomised to a control group (group C) and a DEX group (group D). Utilisation of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) pump, pain intensity, and postoperative recovery variables were recorded. Moreover, intraoperative anaesthetic consumption, hemodynamic parameters, and fluid status were also recorded. During the first 24hours after surgery, patients in group D had a lower pain intensity. The cumulative numbers of IV-PCA pump presses and fentanyl consumption within 24 and 48hours postoperatively in group C were significantly higher than in group D. The time to first IV-PCA attempt was prolonged in group D. In addition, faster flatus passage was observed in group D. Intraoperatively, fewer anaesthetic agents were required in group D. Less fluctuation in hemodynamics and reduced bleeding were also found in group D. The present study revealed that the addition of intravenous infusion of DEX during OLDH provided several benefits in relieving postoperative pain and promoting recovery. Therefore, we concluded that intraoperative DEX infusion may play an important role in enhancing the recovery of patients undergoing OLDH.

Postoperative outcomes of purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy compared to open living donor hepatectomy: a preliminary observational study.

PurposeTo lessen the physical, cosmetic, and psychological burden of donors, purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (PLDH) has been proposed as an ideal method for living donors. Our study aimed to prospectively compare the effect of PLDH and 2 other types of open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) on postoperative pain and recovery.MethodsSixty donors scheduled to undergo donor hepatectomy between March 2015 and November 2017 were included. Donors were divided into 3 groups by surgical technique: OLDH with a subcostal incision (n = 20), group S; OLDH with an upper midline incision (n = 20), group M; and PLDH (n = 20), group L. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain and analgesic requirement during postoperative day (POD) 3. Other variables regarding postoperative recovery were also analyzed.ResultsAlthough pain relief during POD 3, assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) score and analgesic requirement, was similar among the 3 groups, group L showed lower VAS scores and opioid requirements than group M. Moreover, group L was associated with a rapid postoperative recovery evidenced by the shorter hospital length of stay and more frequent return to normal activity on POD 30.ConclusionThis pilot study failed to verify the hypothesis that PLDH reduces postoperative pain. PLDH did not reduce postoperative pain but showed faster recovery than OLDH.

Purely laparoscopic left donor hepatectomy with middle hepatic vein and caudate lobe

Presenter: Essa Aleassa MD | Cleveland Clinic Foundation Background: The volume of liver transplantation has been limited in North America by the low number of liver grafts available from deceased donors. Furthermore, the invasiveness of performing an open living donor hepatectomy makes it a less appealing option to the public. The introduction of minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy has helped increase the number of liver living donors. This approach is growing in North America not yet disseminated yet due to its complexity. This video aims to showcase our approach to a purely laparoscopic left donor hepatectomy that includes the caudate lobe as well as the middle hepatic vein in an effort to maximize the volume and function of the donated left liver lobe graft. Methods: A 29-year-old male underwent a purely laparoscopic left liver lobe living donor with caudate and middle hepatic artery. The patient was preoperatively assessed and noted to be a suitable donor from an anatomical and functional standpoint. The left liver lobe with preserved middle hepatic vein and caudate lobe was resected and donated to a living donor liver transplant recipient. Results: The patient tolerated the procedure without any complications. The operative time was 6 hours and 20 minutes and the estimated blood loss was 200cc. The patient tolerated the procedure well and was discharged on postoperative day 5. Conclusion: Purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy is a highly advanced procedure that aims to decrease enhance the recovery of living donors. Furthermore, this approach is promising to increase the number of liver transplantation performed in North America.

Purely laparoscopic left donor hepatectomy with middle hepatic vein and caudate lobe

Purpose: The volume of liver transplantation has been limited in the Western part of the globe by the low number of liver grafts available from deceased donors. Furthermore, the invasiveness of performing an open living donor hepatectomy makes it a less appealing option to the public. The introduction of minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy has helped increase the number of liver living donors. This approach is growing in North America not yet disseminated yet due to its complexity. This video aims to showcase our approach to a purely laparoscopic left donor hepatectomy that includes the caudate lobe as well as the middle hepatic vein in an effort to maximize the volume and function of the donated left liver lobe graft.

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy in Pediatric Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

Laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy for transplantation has been well established over the past decade. This study aimed to assess its safety and feasibility in pediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) by comparing the surgical and long‐term survival outcomes on both the donor and recipient sides between open and laparoscopic groups. The medical records of 100 patients (≤17 years old) who underwent ABO‐compatible LDLT using a left lateral liver graft between May 2008 and June 2016 were analyzed. A total of 31 donors who underwent pure laparoscopic hepatectomy and their corresponding recipients were included in the study; 69 patients who underwent open living donor hepatectomy during the same period were included as a comparison group. To overcome bias from the different distributions of covariables among the patients in the 2 study groups, a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed. The mean follow‐up periods were 92.9 and 92.7 months in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. The mean postoperative hospital stay of the donors was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (8.1 days) than in the open group (10.6 days; P < 0.001). Overall, the surgical complications in the donors and overall survival rate of recipients did not differ between the groups. Our data suggest that the laparoscopic environment was not associated with long‐term graft survival during pediatric LDLT. In addition, the laparoscopic approach for the donors did not adversely affect the corresponding recipient's outcome. Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for living donors is a safe, feasible, and reproducible procedure for pediatric liver transplantation.

Initial experience with purely laparoscopic living-donor right hepatectomy.

There may be concerns about purely laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (PLDRH) compared with open donor right hepatectomy, especially when performed by surgeons accustomed to open surgery. This study aimed to describe technical tips and pitfalls in PLDRH. Data from donors who underwent PLDRH at Seoul National University Hospital between December 2015 and July 2017 were analysed retrospectively. Endpoints analysed included intraoperative events and postoperative complications. All operations were performed by a single surgeon with considerable experience in open living donor hepatectomy. A total of 26 donors underwent purely laparoscopic right hepatectomy in the study interval. No donor required transfusion during surgery, whereas two underwent reoperation. In two donors, the dissection plane at the right upper deep portion of the midplane was not correct. One donor experienced portal vein injury during caudate lobe transection, and one developed remnant left hepatic duct stenosis. One donor experienced remnant portal vein angulation owing to a different approach angle, and one experienced arterial damage associated with the use of a laparoscopic energy device. One donor had postoperative bleeding due to masking of potential bleeding foci owing to intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopy. Two donors experienced right liver surface damage caused by a xiphoid trocar. Purely laparoscopic donor hepatectomy differs from open donor hepatectomy in terms of angle and caudal view. Therefore, surgeons experienced in open donor hepatectomy must gain adequate experience in laparoscopic liver surgery and make adjustments when performing PLDRH.

Long-term Follow-up of Laparoscope-Assisted Living Donor Hepatectomy

BackgroundWe have introduced and performed laparoscope-assisted surgery in living donor hepatectomy. The objective of this study was to investigate the long-term results of laparoscope-assisted living donor hepatectomy. MethodsFrom 2006 to 2016, laparoscope-assisted living donor hepatectomy was performed in 11 patients (laparoscopic group), and conventional open living donor hepatectomy was performed in 40 patients (conventional group). Intraoperative and postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and analyzed in the laparoscopic group for comparison with the conventional group. ResultsThe median postoperative follow-up period was 88 months (range, 58–120 months) in the laparoscopic group. One donor in the conventional group died from a motor vehicle crash 16 months after surgery. All others were alive and returned to their preoperative activity level. Regarding intraoperative and early (≤90 days after surgery) postoperative complications, 1 patient (1/11, 9%) showed biliary fistula (Grade IIIa) in the laparoscopic group. In the conventional group, 6 patients (6/40, 15%) showed surgical complications of Grade I in 2 patients and Grade II in 4 patients. Regarding late (>90 days after surgery) postoperative complications, biliary stricture was observed in 1 patient of the laparoscopic group; this patient developed hepatolithiasis 6 years after surgery, and endoscopic lithotomy and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy were performed, resulting in successful treatment. Late complications were not observed in the conventional group. ConclusionOne donor in the laparoscopic group showed Grade IIIa late complications. The introduction of laparoscopic surgery to living donor hepatectomy should be performed carefully.

Indocyanine Green Near-Infrared Fluorescence in Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Hepatectomy: a Reliable Road Map for Intra-Hepatic Ducts ?

Indocyanine green (ICG) near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence cholangiography (FC) has shown its usefulness to visualize the biliary ducts in open living donor hepatectomy (LDH) to check the intraoperative biliary anatomy. The fully laparoscopic LDH approach has been recently described. However, this procedure is very demanding for a possible misperception of right parenchymal transection line and the cut point of the lobar biliary ducts (BD). To explore the potential of ICG-NIR-FC method we report our experience in 11 fully laparoscopic left LDH using 5 different protocols. Protocol-A, consisted on intravenous (i.v.) ICG injection of 2.5 mg with immediate cut of the BD; -B, same dose and late cut; -C, 1 mg i.v. and late cut; -D, intra-cystic duct injection of 2.5 mg and immediate cut; -E, intra-cystic injection of 5 mg and immediate cut. Protocol-A showed fast fluorescence in the lobar artery and portal vein followed by the BD sheet; -B showed intraductal excretion with a high parenchymal signal; -C showed a very week signal; -D failed to visualize the ducts; -E showed a good signal without parenchymal fluorescence. ICG-NIR-FC is an additional method to visualize the lobar ducts in fully laparoscopy LDH, but still insufficient for the segmental ducts.