Search

BACKGROUND With the introduction of rituximab, ABO-incompatible (ABOi) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been considered a feasible and safe procedure to overcome the shortage of organ donors. However, higher biliary complication rates remain an unresolved problem in the ABOi group. In our center, biliary anastomosis has been done with microscopic biliary reconstruction (MBR), which effectively reduced the biliary complication rate. The aim of the current study was to investigate whether the microscopic approach reduced anastomotic biliary complications in ABOi LDLT. MATERIAL AND METHODS From March 2006 to December 2018, 30 adult ABOi and 60 ABO-compatible (ABOc) LDLT patients were selected from over 1300 recipients through 1: 2 propensity score-matched cohorts. All patients received MBR during the transplantation. Biliary complications included bile leakage and biliary stricture. Patients with diffuse intrahepatic biliary stricture were excluded from analysis. RESULTS Patient characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. There was no in-hospital mortality in the ABOi LDLT. The long-term survival rates of the ABOi patients were comparable to those of the patients that underwent ABOc LDLT (87.1% vs 87.4%, P=0.964). Those in the ABOi group with anastomotic biliary complications were about 40%, which was higher than in the ABOc patients (40% vs 15%, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS Microscopic biliary reconstruction does not help to reduce the high biliary complication rate in ABOi LDLT. Further investigation and identification regarding other risk factors and precautionary measures involving immunologic and adaptation mechanisms are needed.

BACKGROUND Liver transplantation (LT) is the best radical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Salvage liver transplantation (SalvLT) provides good outcomes for recurrent HCC cases after initial curative liver resection (LR). However, the salvage strategy is not feasible in all situations due to aggressive recurrences. Recently, sequential liver transplantation (SeqLT) was proposed for cases that show adverse pathological features after LR, thus LT is performed pre-emptively before recurrence. In this report, we compared the outcomes of SalvLT and SeqLT for surgical treatment of HCC. MATERIAL AND METHODS One hundred and ten cases underwent LR for HCC, then were subjected to either SalvLT (n=91) or SeqLT (n=19), from January 2001 to December 2015. For cases that underwent several LR before LT, we collected the data of the last LR before transplantation. A comparison was made according to pre- and post-transplant clinical and pathological variables. Survival analysis and comparison between both pathways are provided. RESULTS The median interval (months) between LR and LT for the SeqLT group and the SalvLT group were 9.6 and 22.2, respectively. (p=0.01). The LR histopathological features were similar in both groups. In the SalvLT group, the histopathological comparison between the criteria of last LR and the criteria of liver explants revealed that 14 cases advanced from stage I to stage II, one cases from stage I to stage IIIa, one case from stage I to stage IIIb, one case from stage I to stage IIIc, three cases from stage II to stage IIIb and one case from stage II to stage IIIc. The overall rate of pathological upstaging in the SalvLT group was 27%. The incidence of post-transplant HCC recurrence was 5% (1/19) and 11% (10/91) for the SeqLT and SalvLT groups, respectively (p=0.4). The incidence of post-LT in-hospital mortality was 0% among the SeqLT group and 2% (2/91) among the SalvLT group. The estimated rates of five-year overall survival and cancer specific survival for the SeqLT group versus the SalvLT group were (92.3% versus 87.6%; p=0.4) and (92.3% versus 91.9%; p=0.7), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The SeqLT approach might be associated with low incidence of cancer recurrence, better overall survival, and less operative mortality. Another possible benefit is the avoidance of aggressive non-transplantable HCC recurrences. More studies and/or randomization are required for highre evidence conclusions.

BACKGROUND Because the outcome of liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma is often poor, cholangiocarcinoma is a contraindication for liver transplantation in most centers. Combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma is a rare type of primary hepatic malignancy containing features of hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. Diagnosing combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma pre-operatively is difficult. Because of sparse research presentations worldwide, we report our experience with living donor liver transplantation for combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 710 patients underwent living donor liver transplantation at our institution from April 2006 to June 2014; 377 of them received transplantation because of hepatocellular carcinoma with University of California San Francisco (UCSF) staging criteria fulfilled pre-operatively. Eleven patients (2.92%) were diagnosed with combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma confirmed pathologically from explant livers; we reviewed these cases retrospectively. Long-term survival was compared between patients diagnosed with combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma and patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma. RESULTS The mean age of the patients in our series was 60.2 years, and the median follow-up period was 23.9 months. Four patients were diagnosed with a recurrence during the follow-up period, including one intra-hepatic and three extra-hepatic recurrences. Four patients died due to tumor recurrence. Except for patients with advanced-stage cancer, disease-free survival of patients with combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma compared with that of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma was 80% versus 97.2% in 1 year, and 46.7% versus 92.5% in 3 years (p

BACKGROUND Once-daily tacrolimus provides better compliance for transplant recipients. However, the conversion strategies of dosage and concentration from twice- to once-daily are not well studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the dosage of conversion, follow-up strategy, and safety of conversion to once-daily tacrolimus in stable and long-term recipients after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). MATERIAL AND METHODS From January 2011 to November 2012, we selectively converted 35 stable LDLT recipients to once-daily tacrolimus based on 1-to-1 daily dose. The tacrolimus dosage, trough level, liver and renal function before conversion, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after conversion were recorded. RESULTS Tacrolimus trough level dropped significantly after conversion (2.72±1.65 to 1.85±1.25 ng/mL, p

In liver transplantation, blood loss can be massive, requiring timely and rapid fluid resuscitation. Maintaining proper documentation of fluids during such situations can be difficult and may often lead to counting errors. We report our method of documentation of fluid management during liver transplantation.Each unit of red blood cells (125 cc) that comes from the blood bank had a serial number of 10 Arabic numbers which were verified and double-checked. Each unit was then numbered and labeled as encircled absolute numbers (e.g., 1, 2, 3). Both the encircled number and the serial number of the bag were recorded in the anesthesia chart. Each liter of crystalloids and colloids were similarly numbered and labeled in sequence for ease of calculation. At the end of the operation, the nurse anesthetist ascertains that the number of units of blood products used matched with the number of units supplied by the blood bank. The total amounts of crystalloids and colloids given during the operation was also calculated, rechecked and written in a tabulated form.Since the introduction of this method, we have detected and readily corrected 3 incidences of counting discrepancy in the total units of blood products transfused and the products supplied by the blood bank. Moreover, our records have now become transparent data that are easily retrievable for future scientific research.Our method of documentation of fluid management during liver transplantation is easy, accurate and effective.