We retrospectively analyzed the causes, risk factors, and impact of early relaparotomy after adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) on the posttransplant outcome. Adult recipients who underwent initial LDLT at our institution between August 1997 and August 2015 (n = 196) were included. Any patients who required early retransplantation were excluded. Early relaparotomy was defined as surgical treatment within 30 days after LDLT. Relaparotomy was performed 66 times in 52 recipients (a maximum of 4 times in 1 patient). The reasons for relaparotomy comprised postoperative bleeding (39.4%), vascular complications (27.3%), suspicion of abdominal sepsis or bile leakage (25.8%), and others (7.6%). A multivariate analysis revealed that previous upper abdominal surgery and prolonged operative time were independent risk factors for early relaparotomy. The overall survival rate in the relaparotomy group was worse than that in the nonrelaparotomy group (6 months, 67.3% versus 90.1%, P < 0.001; 1 year, 67.3% versus 88.6%, P < 0.001; and 5 years, 62.6% versus 70.6%, P = 0.06). The outcome of patients who underwent 2 or more relaparotomies was worse compared with patients who underwent only 1 relaparotomy. In a subgroup analysis according to the cause of initial relaparotomy, the survival rate of the postoperative bleeding group was comparable with the nonrelaparotomy group (P = 0.96). On the other hand, the survival rate of the vascular complication group was significantly worse than that of the nonrelaparotomy group (P = 0.001). Previous upper abdominal surgery is a risk factor for early relaparotomy after LDLT. A favorable longterm outcome is expected in patients who undergo early relaparotomy due to postoperative bleeding. Liver Transplantation 22 1519-1525 2016 AASLD.

Background

The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of the most updated version and largest group of our standardized hybrid (laparoscopic mobilization and hepatectomy through midline incision) living donor (LD) hemihepatectomy compared with those from a conventional laparotomy in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Of 237 adult-to-adult LDLTs from August 1997 to March 2017, 110 LDs underwent the hybrid procedure. Preoperative and operative factors were analyzed and compared with conventional laparotomy (n = 126). The median duration of laparoscopic usage was 26 minutes in the hybrid group. Although there was improvement in applying this procedure over time from the beginning of the series of cases studied, blood loss and operative duration were still smaller and shorter in the hybrid group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the incidence of postoperative complications greater than or equal to Clavien-Dindo class III. There was no difference in recipient outcome between the groups. Our standardized procedure of hybrid LD hepatectomy is applicable and safe for all types of LD hepatectomies, and it enables the benefit of both the laparoscopic and the open approach in a transplant center without a laparoscopic expert. Liver Transplantation 24 363-368 2018 AASLD.

Background Although hepatectomy procedures should be designed to provide both

BackgroundGiven the expected increase in the number of elderly recipients, details regarding how clinical factors influence the outcome in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for the elderly remain unclear. We examined the survival outcomes according to the results of donor age-based and graft volume–based analyses and assessed the impact of prognostic factors on the survival after LDLT for elderly recipients.MethodsThe 198 adult recipients were classified into 2 groups: an elderly group (n = 70, E group; ≥ 60 years of age) and a younger group (n = 128, Y group; <60 years of age). We analyzed the prognostic factors for the survival in the E group and the survival rate for both groups at several follow-up points and conducted subgroup analyses in the E group by combining the donor age (≥50 vs <50 years) and graft weight (GW)/standard liver volume (SLV) (≥40% vs <40%).ResultsDonor age (hazard ratio [HR], 2.17; P = 0.062) and GW/SLV (HR, 1.80; P = 0.23) tended to have a high HR in the E group. The overall patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 78.3%, 73.0%, and 61.0% in the E group, and 82.0%, 75.1%, and 69.2% in the Y group, respectively (P = 0.459). However, the outcomes tended to be worse in recipients of grafts from donors ≥50 years of age than in those with grafts from younger donors with GW/SLV < 40% (P = 0.048).ConclusionsA worse outcome might be associated with aging of the donor, which leads to impairment of the graft function and liver regeneration. Both the graft volume and donor age should be considered when choosing grafts for LDLT in elderly patients.

BackgroundThere have been no previous reports how Kupffer cells affect the outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with an elderly donor. The aim of this study was to elucidate the influence of Kupffer cells on LDLT.MethodsA total of 161 adult recipients underwent LDLT. The graft survival, prognostic factors for survival, and graft failure after LDLT were examined between cases with a young donor (<50, n = 112) and an elderly donor (≥50, N = 49). The Kupffer cells, represented by CD68-positive cell in the graft, were examined in the young and elderly donors.ResultsIn a multivariable analysis, a donor older than 50 years, sepsis, and diabetes mellitus were significant predictors of graft failure after LDLT. The CD68 in younger donors was significantly more expressed than that in elderly donors. The group with a less number of CD68-positive cells in the graft had a significantly poor survival in the elderly donor group and prognostic factor for graft failure.ConclusionsThe worse outcome of LDLT with elderly donors might be related to the lower number of Kupffer cells in the graft, which can lead to impaired recovery of the liver function and may predispose patients to infectious diseases after LDLT.

Aim It is reportedly difficult to accurately assess the liver reserve capacity of patients with HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) co‐infection through contaminated blood products by the Child–Pugh (CP) classification. Therefore, we investigated a clinically applicable scoring system in determining the risk of esophageal varices in HIV/HCV co‐infected patients, known as latent portal hypertension leading to esophageal varices. Methods Forty‐three patients with HIV/HCV co‐infection underwent clinical examinations, including endoscopy and assessment of hepatic reserve, in our department between 2009 and 2017. Child–Pugh score, the recently developed albumin–bilirubin (ALBI) grade, and the albumin–indocyanine green evaluation (ALICE) were compared to evaluate their diagnostic accuracy for the detection of esophageal varices using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results The patients were all male hemophiliacs and were positive for both HIV and HCV antibodies, with a median age of 45 years (range, 29–66 years). Thirty‐seven patients (84.1%) were classified as CP A at the examination. The comparison of AUROCs showed a superior diagnostic accuracy for ALICE (AUROC = 0.814) to detect esophageal varices. The positive prediction rate was the highest with ALICE if −2.325 was set, and the negative prediction rate was the highest with ALBI if −2.575 was set. The ALICE showed the highest accuracy compared to other two scores. Conclusion The ALICE score was found to be the most valuable system for portal hypertension in HIV/HCV co‐infected hemophilia patients. Because of its high specificity, ALICE for secondary surveillance could be used after other markers such as the aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index and Fibrosis‐4 index.

Background: Rituximab (RTx) desensitization protocol offered good outcome in ABO-incompatible (ABOi) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). However, diffuse intrahepatic biliary stricture (DIHBS) is still inevitable hurdle. We selectively added postoperative high dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and/or simultaneous splenectomy if ABO isoagglutinin titer just before liver transplantation after plasma exchange (PE) was higher than 1/16. Herein, we reported the excellent outcome of ABOi LDLT without DIHBS using tailored desensitization protocol and compared it with that of ABO-compatible (ABOc) LDLT.Methods: Sixty-five cases (14.8%) of ABOi LDLTs were performed among 438 primary adult LDLTs in our center between March 2012 and June 2017. We performed 1-to-2 propensity score matching (PSM) to extract 60 cases of ABOi LDLTs and 120 cases of ABOc LDLTs.Results: There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between ABOi and ABOc recipients. There were no significant differences in complications and rejection. There was no DIHBS in both groups. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.3%, 86.7%, and 82.9% in ABOi group and 96.7%, 86.7%, and 85.4% in ABOc group, respectively (P=0.88). Most common cause of deaths of both groups was hepatocellular recurrence. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year biliary complication (anastomosis leakage or stricture) free survival rates were 81.4%, 69.5%, and 67.5% in ABOi group and 83.0%, 81.3%, and 80.0% in ABOc group, with no significant differences (P=0.11).Conclusions: RTx-based tailored (optional IVIG + splenectomy) desensitization protocol for ABOi LDLT was feasible and acceptable.