AIM: To investigate middle hepatic vein (MHV) management in adult living donor liver transplantation and safer remnant volumes (RV). METHODS: There were 59 grafts with and 12 grafts without MHV (including 4 with MHV-5/8 reconstructions). All donors underwent our five-step protocol evaluation containing a preoperative protocol liver biopsy Congestive vs non-congestive RV, remnant-volume-bodyweight ratios (RVBWR) and postoperative outcomes were evaluated in 71 right graft living donors. Dominant vs non-dominant MHV anatomy in total liver volume (d-MHV/TLV vs nd-MHV/TLV) was constellated with large/small congestion volumes (CV-index). Small for size (SFS) and non-SFS remnant considerations were based on standard cutoff -RVBWR and RV/TLV. Non-congestive RVBWR was based on non-congestive RV. RESULTS: MHV and non-MHV remnants showed no significant differences in RV, RV/TLV, RVBWR, total bilirubin, or INR. SFS-remnants with RV/TLV < 30% and non-SFS-remnants with RV/TLV ≥ 30% showed Prospective Study Radtke A et al. Liver failure in live donors of right grafts 6009 May 21, 2015|Volume 21|Issue 19| WJG|www.wjgnet.com no significant differences either. RV and RVBWR for non-MHV (n = 59) and MHV-containing (n = 12) remnants were 550 ± 95 mL and 0.79 ± 0.1 mL vs 568 ± 97 mL and 0.79 ± 0.13, respectively (P = 0.423 and P = 0.919. Mean left RV/TLV was 35.8% ± 3.9%. Non-MHV (n = 59) and MHV-containing (n = 12) remnants (34.1% ± 3% vs 36% ± 4% respectively, P = 0.148. Eight SFS-remnants with RVBWR < 0.65 had a significantly smaller RV/TLV than 63 non-SFS-remnants with RVBWR ≥ 0.65 [SFS: RV/TLV 32.4% (range: 28%-35.7%) vs non-SFS: RV/TLV 36.2% (range: 26.1%-45.5%), P < 0.009. Six SFS-remnants with RV/TLV < 30% had significantly smaller RVBWR than 65 non-SFS-remnants with RV/TLV ≥ 30% (0.65 (range: 0.6-0.7) vs 0.8 (range: 0.6-1.27), P < 0.01. Two (2.8%) donors developed reversible liver failure. RVBWR and RV/TLV were concordant in 25%-33% of SFS and in 92%-94% of non-SFS remnants. MHV management options including complete MHV vs MHV-4A selective retention were necessary in n = 12 vs n = 2 remnants based on particularly risky congestive and non-congestive volume constellations. CONCLUSION: MHV procurement should consider individual remnant congestive-and non-congestive volume components and anatomy characteristics, RVBWR-RV/TLV constellation enables the identification of marginally small remnants.
Between February 1997 and December 2001, 311 adult-to-adult living donor liver transplants (A-A LDLTs) were performed at the Asan Medical Center for patients above 20 years of age. Indications for A-A LDLT were: chronic hepatitis B (203), chronic hepatitis C (5), hepatocellular carcinoma (64), alcoholic cirrhosis (9), cryptogenic cirrhosis (4), secondary biliary cirrhosis (5), primary biliary cirrhosis (1), Wilson' s disease (2), autoimmune hepatitis (1), hepatic tuberculosis (1), cholangiocarcinoma (1), fulminant hepatic failure (14) and primary non-function of cadaveric liver graft (1). Of 311 A-A LDLTs, 36 were of medical high urgency, 20 were for acute and subacute hepatic failure, 15 were for hepato-renal syndrome and 1 was for primary non-function. Recipient age ranged from 27 to 64 years. Donor age ranged from 16 to 62 years. There was no donor mortality. Implanted liver grafts were categorized into seven types: 175 modified right lobe (MRL), 70 left lobe, 32 right lobe, 20 dual grafts, 10 left lobe plus caudate lobe, three extended right lobe and one posterior segment. In MRL, the tributaries of the middle hepatic vein were reconstructed by interpositioning a vein graft. Indication for dual graft implantation was the same as single graft A-A LDLT, and four of 20 were emergency cases. Of 20 dual grafts, 14 received two left lobes, four received a left lobe and a lateral segment, one received a right lobe and a left lobe and one received a lateral segment and a posterior segment. Graft volume ranged from 28% to 83% of the standard liver volume of the recipients. There were 33 (10.6%) in-hospital mortalities (< 4 months) among the 310 patients after 311 A-A LDLTs. Of the 36 patients receiving emergency transplants, 31 survived. These encouraging results justify the expansion of A-A LDLT in coping with increasing demands, even in urgent situations. We have aimed to introduce the establishment of the efficacy of A-A LDLT in various end-stage chronic and acute liver diseases, as well as new technical advances to overcome small graft-size syndrome by using dual-graft implantation and MRL, both of which were first developed in our department.
Background: Although numerous chemotherapeutic agents have been tested, the role of systemic chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been clarified. New therapeutic strategies are thus needed to improve outcomes, and we designed this study with new effective drug combination.
Kidney length is the most useful parameter for clinical measurement of kidney size, and is useful to distinguish acute kidney injury from chronic kidney disease. In this prospective observational study of 437 normal children aged between 0 and < 13 years, kidney length was measured using sonography. There were good correlations between kidney length and somatic values, including age, weight, height, and body surface area. The rapid growth of height during the first 2 years of life was intimately associated with a similar increase in kidney length, suggesting that height should be considered an important factor correlating with kidney length. Based on our findings, the following regression equation for the reference values of bilateral kidney length for Korean children was obtained: kidney length of the right kidney (cm) = 0.051 × height (cm) + 2.102; kidney length of the left kidney (cm) = 0.051 × height (cm) + 2.280. This equation may aid in the diagnosis of various kidney disorders.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.